U.S. SECURITY ASSOCIATES, INC.
v.
EDUARDO FERNANDEZ
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.
The Third District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court's denial of summary judgment, holding that disputed facts regarding agency status must be submitted to a jury rather than decided as a matter of law.
When evidence raises material factual disputes about whether an agency relationship exists, summary judgment is improper and the issue must be submitted to the jury.
[1] Agency status is ordinarily a question of fact for the jury unless the evidence indisputably establishes no connection between principal and agent, and summary judgment i…
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“In examining whether agency exists, the principal's actions are the primary indication of the relationship, and such examination is generally done by the trier of fact unless there is indisputably no connection between the principal and the agent.”
Citing S. Fla. Coastal Elec., Inc. v. Treasures on Bay II Condo Ass'n, Inc., establishing the standard for agency determination.
U.S. Security Associates, Inc. appealed a non-final order from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County denying summary judgment in a dispute involving…
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 Factual Dispute cases and more on FLexlaw
HENDON, J.
Affirmed. S. Fla. Coastal Elec., Inc. v. Treasures on Bay II Condo Ass'n, Inc., 89 So. 3d 264, 267 (Fla. 3d DCA 2012) (“In examining whether agency exists, the principal's actions are the primary indication of the relationship, and such examination is generally done by the trier of fact unless there is indisputably no connection between the principal and the agent.”); M.S. v. Nova S.E. Univ. Inc., 881 So. 2d 614, 617 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004) (“If the evidence raises any issue of material fact, if it is conflicting, if it will permit different reasonable inferences, or if it tends to prove the issue, it should be submitted to the jury as a question of fact to be determined by it.”); G4S Secure Sols. (USA), Inc. v. Morrow, 210 So. 3d 92, 94 (Fla. 2d DCA 2016) (holding while agency status is generally a question of fact, it may be decided as a question of law “in those cases where the party opposing summary judgment is unable to point to any conflicting facts or inferences to be drawn from the facts.”); Gradia v. Baptist Hosp., Inc., 345 So. 3d 385, 388 (Fla. 1st DCA 2022) (holding evidence supporting either an independent contractor or an agency relationship precluded summary judgment).
2
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- S. Fla. Coastal Elec., Inc. v. Treasures ON the BAY II Condo Ass'n, Inc., 89 So. 3d 264 (Fla. 3d DCA 2012)
- M.S. and N.S. v. Nova Se. Univ. Inc., 881 So. 2d 614 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004)
- Latisha A. Gradia v. Baptist Hosp., Inc., 345 So. 3d 385 (Fla. 1st DCA 2022)