DESTIN POINTE OWNERS' ASSOCIATION, INC.
v.
DESTIN PARCEL 160, LLC, A FLORIDA LIMITED ETC. ET AL.
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Summary judgment orders and final judgment are affirmed where the appellate record contains ample documentary and evidentiary support for the trial court's rulings, even though the orders did not specify the material facts.
[1] Summary judgment orders need not specify material facts in detail where the appellate record contains ample documentary and evidentiary support for the trial court's ruli…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“Appellate review would be greatly simplified and made more efficient, however, by the inclusion of the uncontroverted material facts in summary judgment orders where rule 1.510(d) applies.”
The court's encouragement to trial courts regarding proper specification of facts in summary judgment orders.
Destin Pointe Owners' Association brought an amended complaint against Destin Parcel 160, LLC and related entities. The trial court granted summary ju…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Bench Trial cases and more on FLexlaw
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
STATE OF FLORIDA
_____________________________
Nos. 1D17-2924 & 1D18-1017 _____________________________
DESTIN POINTE OWNERS’ ASSOCIATION, INC.,
Appellant,
v.
DESTIN PARCEL 160, LLC, a Florida limited liability company, DESTIN GUARDIAN CORPORATION, a Florida corporation, DESTIN POINTE HOLDINGS, INC., a Florida corporation, and DESTIN PARCEL B, LLC, a Florida limited liability company,
Appellees. _____________________________
On appeal from the Circuit Court for Okaloosa County. William F. Stone, Judge.
July 22, 2019
PER CURIAM.
2
Appellant challenges the orders granting summary judgment for the Appellees on certain counts of its amended complaint1 and the final judgment entered upon these orders and, in addition, the trial court’s declarations after bench trial on the remaining counts. Upon review of the voluminous appellate record and the arguments presented by the parties, we affirm both the grants of summary judgments and the final judgment. We write only to encourage trial courts to specify in summary judgment orders the material “facts that appear without substantial controversy” and those facts which remain “actually and in good faith controverted.” Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.510(d). While the orders granting summary judgment for Appellees on counts I, III and V of the amended complaint conclude that there are no genuine disputes of material fact, the facts material to the requests for declaratory judgment on these counts were not specified in the orders or in the final judgment. However, the appellate record included ample documentary and other evidentiary support for the trial court’s rulings. Accordingly, our appellate review of the summary judgments was possible without more detailed orders. See Holiday Isle Improvement Ass’n, Inc. v. Destin Parcel 160, LLC, 254 So. 3d 1109, (Fla. 1st DCA 2018); Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. Forbes/Cohen Fla. Props., L.P., 223 So. 3d 292 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017). Appellate review would be greatly simplified and made more efficient, however, by the inclusion of the uncontroverted material facts in summary judgment orders where rule 1.510(d) applies.2
3
AFFIRMED.
RAY, C.J., and BILBREY and JAY, JJ., concur.
_____________________________
Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331. _____________________________
David A. Theriaque and S. Brent Spain of Theriaque & Spain, Tallahassee, for Appellant.
Daniel C. O’Rourke and Dana C. Matthews of Matthews & Jones, LLP, Destin, for Appellees.
(Fla. 2012) (quoting Robertson v. State, 829 So. 2d 901, 906-07 (Fla. 2002)).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Swett v. State, 829 So. 2d 901 (Fla. 2002)
- Shands Teaching Hosp. & Clinics, Inc. v. Mercury Ins. Co. OF Fla., 97 So. 3d 204 (Fla. 2012)
- Holiday Isle Improvement Ass'n, Inc. v. Destin Parcel 160, LLC, 254 So. 3d 1109 (Fla. 1st DCA 2018)