STERLING MIRROR COMPANY, LLC, ETC.
v.
THE JORDON GLASS CORPORATION
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 properly granted where the moving party was entitled to judgment as a matter of law and no genuine issue of material fact existed.
[1] Summary judgment is proper if there is no genuine issue of material fact and if the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law.
[2] Summary judgment is designed to test the sufficiency of the evidence to determine if there is sufficient evidence at issue to justify a trial or formal hearing on the iss…
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceSterling Mirror Company appealed from summary judgment entered in favor of The Jordon Glass Corporation in a circuit court action in Miami-Dade County…
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 Burden Of Proof In Summary Judgment cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Affirmed. See Volusia County v. Aberdeen at Ormand Beach, L.P., 760 So. 2d 126, 130 (Fla. 2000) (“Summary judgment is proper if there is no genuine issue of material fact and if the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law.”); The Fla. Bar v. Greene, 926 So. 2d 1195, 1200 (Fla. 2006) (“Summary judgment is designed to test the sufficiency of the evidence to determine if there is sufficient evidence at issue to justify a trial or formal hearing on the issues raised in the pleadings.”); Campbell v. Riggs, 310 So. 3d 68, 70 (Fla. 4th DCA 2021) (“[O]nce there is a motion for summary judgment that is supported by affidavit or other factual showing, the burden shifts to the opposing party to show by appropriate means that genuine and material issues do remain to be tried.” (quoting Holl v. Talcott, 191 So. 2d 40, 42 (Fla. 1966))); Cong. Park Off. Condos II, LLC v. First-Citizens Bank & Tr. Co., 105 So. 3d 602, 610 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013) (“[W]hen a decree of the trial court is brought . . . on appeal the duty rests upon the appealing party to make error clearly appear.” (quoting Lynn v. City of Fort Lauderdale, 81 So. 2d 511, 513 (Fla. 1955))).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (33 total)
-
Cong. Park Off. Condos II, LLC v. First-Citizens Bank & Tr. Co., 105 So. 3d 602 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013)…facts established in the trial court. As the Florida Supreme Court has aptly observed, “when a decree of the trial court is brought ... on appeal the duty rests upon the appealing party to make error clearly appear.” Lynn v. City of Fort Lauderdale, 81 So. 2d 511, 513 (Fla.1955) (citing FEC News Co. v. Pearce, 58 So. 2d 843 (Fla.1952)). To this end, [a]n appellant does not discharge this duty by merely posing a question with an accompanying assertion that it was improperly answered in the court below and th…
-
Caloosa Prop. Owners Ass'n, Inc. v. Palm Beach Cnty. Bd. OF Cnty. Comm'rs, 429 So. 2d 1260 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983)…city of ... [appellant’s] argument on the subject, we decline to recognize the issue[s] as adequately raised for decision.” Carr v. Central Florida Aluminium Products, 402 So. 2d 565, 568 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981); see also Lynn v. City of Ft. Lauderdale, 81 So. 2d 511, 513 (Fla.1955).…
-
Dirk Allan Carr v. Cent. Fla. Aluminum Prods., Inc., 402 So. 2d 565 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981)…existence when the Constitution was adopted. See Kluger v. White, 281 So. 2d 1 (Fla.1973). In view of the paucity of Carr’s argument on the subject, we decline to recognize the issue as adequately raised for decision. Lynn v. City of Ft. Lauderdale, 81 So. 2d 511, 513 (Fla.1955); 5 C.J.S. Appeal and Error § 1324(3) at pp. 341-42 (1958). AFFIRMED. MILLS, J., concurs. WENTWORTH, J., concurs specially with opinion. . U.S.Const. amend. XIV § 1; Art. I, § 2, Fla. Const. . U.S.Const. amend. XIV § 1; Art. I, §…
Previewing 3 of 33 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Gory Roofing Tile Mfg., Inc. v. Davison, 191 So. 2d 40 (Fla. 1966)
- Volusia Cnty. v. Aberdeen AT Ormond Beach, L.P., 760 So. 2d 126 (Fla. 2000)
- THE Florida BAR v. Greene, 926 So. 2d 1195 (Fla. 2006)
- Cong. Park Off. Condos II, LLC v. First-Citizens Bank & Tr. Co., 105 So. 3d 602 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013)
- Lynn v. City OF Fort Lauderdale, 81 So. 2d 511 (Fla. 1955)
- Sterling Mirror Co., LLC v. THE Jordon Glass Corp. (Fla. 3d DCA 2022)