ALVAREZ, FELTMAN & DA SILVA, P.L., N/K/A ALVAREZ, FELTMAN, DA SILVA & COSTA, P.L.
v.
BIG PINE GAS & FOOD, INC.

Fla. 3d DCA | 2022-07-13
No. 21-1236
Barry, MacPhail, Narick
Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (2022)

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.


Holding

An appellate court must affirm a trial court's summary judgment that reaches the right result even if based on wrong reasoning, provided the record supports an alternative legal theory.


Headnotes

[1] An appellate court may affirm a trial court's decision that reaches the correct result, even if for the wrong reasons, provided there is support for an alternative theory…

[2] Speculation, surmise, and conjecture are insufficient to create a disputed issue of fact in opposition to a motion for summary judgment.

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 intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

Alvarez, Feltman & Da Silva, P.L. brought an appeal from a summary judgment decision in Monroe County. The underlying dispute involved employment disc…

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.


Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See Destin Pointe Owners’ Ass’n, Inc. v. Destin Parcel 160, LLC, 276 So. 3d 490, 491 n.2 (Fla. 1st DCA 2019) (explaining that on summary judgment, an appellate court is obligated to “affirm a trial court that ‘reaches the right result, but for the wrong reasons’ if there is ‘support for the alternative theory or principle of law in the record before the trial court’”) (quoting Shands Teaching Hosp. & Clinics, Inc. v. Mercury Ins. Co. of Fla., 97 So. 3d 204, 212 (Fla. 2012)); State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. M & E Diagnostic Servs., Inc., 327 So. 3d 363, 365 (Fla. 3d DCA 2021) (noting that speculation, surmise, and conjecture are legally insufficient to create a disputed issue of fact in opposition to a motion for summary judgment); see also Rosenberg v. Levin, 409 So. 2d 1016, 1021 (Fla. 1982) (adopting the modified quantum meruit rule which limits recovery to the maximum amount of the contract fee in all premature discharge cases involving fixed and contingency employment contracts); Brickell Place Condo. Ass’n, Inc. v. Joseph H. Ganguzza & Assocs., P.A., 31 So. 3d 287, 290 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010) (same).


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw