JESUS G. JOUBERT RODRIGUEZ, ETC.
v.
CENTRAL FLORIDA EQUIPMENT RENTALS, INC.
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 was improper where genuine issues of material fact remained regarding the contractor's legal duty and legal causation in a wrongful-death action.
[1] A party moving for summary judgment bears the preliminary burden of demonstrating the absence of genuine issues of material fact entitling it to judgment as a matter of l…
[2] Summary judgment is improper when genuine issues of material fact remain in dispute regarding the existence of legal duty and legal causation.
Previewing 2 of 3 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceJesus G. Joubert Rodriguez, as personal representative of his deceased wife Ivon Arbesun Nunez's estate, brought a wrongful-death action against Centr…
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 Legal Duty cases and more on FLexlaw
Boyd Richards Parker & Colonnelli, PL and Elaine D. Walter and Yvette R. Lavelle and Maria E. Dalmanieras, for appellee. Before LOGUE, SCALES and LOBREE, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
In this wrongful-death action, Jesus G. Joubert Rodriguez, the personal representative of the estate of his deceased wife, Ivon Arbesun Nunez, challenges a final summary judgment entered in favor of Central Florida Equipment Rentals, Inc. (the “contractor”). He contends that, in moving for summary judgment on the issues of legal duty and legal causation, the contractor failed to meet its preliminary burden to show that there were no genuine issues of material fact entitling it to judgment as a matter of law.
We review the trial court’s entry of summary judgment de novo, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party. See Luckman v. Wills, 306 So. 3d 990, 993 n.2 (Fla. 3d DCA 2020); Sierra v. Shevin, 767 So. 2d 524, 525 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000). Upon our thorough examination of the record, we agree that the trial court erred in granting summary judgment, because genuine issues of material fact remain in dispute regarding the existence of legal duty and legal causation.
Reversed and remanded for further proceedings.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Sierra v. Shevin, 767 So. 2d 524 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000)
- Luckman v. Wills, 306 So. 3d 990 (Fla. 3d DCA 2020)