HARVEY ROSS
v.
CITIZENS PROPERTY INSURANCE 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 nonmoving party failed to present sufficient evidence to support its case on a dispositive issue.
[1] Under Florida's revised summary judgment standard, the moving party satisfies its burden when it demonstrates an absence of evidence supporting the nonmoving party's case…
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 Florida it will no longer be plausible to maintain that 'the existence of any competent evidence creating an issue of fact, however credible or incredible, substantial or trivial, stops the inquiry and precludes summary judgment, so long as the 'slightest doubt' is raised.'”
Court explaining the shift from the old summary judgment standard to Florida's new standard
Harvey Ross appealed a summary judgment entered in favor of Citizens Property Insurance Corporation in a Miami-Dade County circuit court action.…
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 At Trial cases and more on FLexlaw
Nwahiri Law, PLLC and Tobechuku Tony Nwahiri, for appellant. Williams, Leininger & Cosby, PA, and Carri S. Leininger and Maureen Martinez (N. Palm Beach), for appellee. Before LOGUE, C.J., and FERNANDEZ and LOBREE, JJ. PER CURIAM.
Affirmed. See Rich v. Narog, 366 So. 3d 1111, 1117–18 (Fla. 3d DCA 2022) (explaining Florida’s “new” summary judgment standard and stating that “[i]n Florida it will no longer be plausible to maintain that ‘the existence of any competent evidence creating an issue of fact, however credible or incredible, substantial or trivial, stops the inquiry and precludes summary judgment, so long as the ‘slightest doubt’ is raised.’” (quoting In re Amendments to Fla. Rule of Civil Procedure 1.510, 317 So. 3d 72, 76 (Fla. 2021))); Id. at 1118 (stating that “where . . . the nonmoving party bears the burden of proof on a dispositive issue at trial, the moving party need only demonstrate ‘that there is an absence of evidence to support the nonmoving party’s case’” (footnote omitted) (citing Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 325 (1986))); Chowdhury v. BankUnited, N.A., 366 So. 3d 1130, 1133 n.2 (Fla. 3d DCA 2023).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (21 total)
-
Ross v. Citizens Prop. Ins. Corp., 366 So. 3d 1130 (Fla. 3d DCA 2024)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See Rich v. Narog, 366 So. 3d 1111, 1117–18 (Fla. 3d DCA 2022) (explaining Florida’s “new” summary judgment standard and stating that “[i]n Florida it will no longer be plausible to maintain that ‘the existence of any competent evidence creating an issue of fact, however credible or…1 / 2
-
Flaherty v. Flaherty, 389 So. 3d 705 (Fla. 3d DCA 2025)…v. Frueh, 369 So. 3d 1211, 1216 (Fla. 2d DCA 2023) (noting that “[o]nly disputes over facts that might affect the outcome of the suit under the governing law will properly preclude the entry of summary judgment” (quotation omitted)); Rich v. Narog, 366 So. 3d 1111, 1118 (Fla. 3d DCA 2022) (“Specifically, it is incumbent upon the nonmoving party to come forward with evidentiary material demonstrating that a genuine issue of fact exists as to an element necessary for the non-movant to prevail at trial.”); see a…
-
Phil Harris Constr., Inc. v. Action Rentals Holdings, LLC, 356 So. 3d 292 (Fla. 3d DCA 2024)…ecord to affirm the judgment under review. See G & G In-Between Bridge Club Corp. v. Palm Plaza Assocs., Ltd., 356 So. 3d 292, 299 (Fla. 2d DCA 2023); Lloyd S. Meisels, P.A. v. Dobrofsky, 341 So. 3d 1131, 1135–36 (Fla. 4th DCA 2022); Rich v. Narog, 366 So. 3d 1111, 1118 (Fla. 3d DCA 2022); see also Umana v. Citizens Prop. Ins. Corp., 282 So. 3d 933, 935 (Fla. 3d DCA 2019); Knowles v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., 994 So. 2d 1218, 1219–20 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008). Affirmed.…
Previewing 3 of 21 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (U.S. 1986)
- Siegler v. Empire Dawn, LLC, 321 So. 3d 692 (Fla. 5th DCA 2022)
- Ross v. Citizens Prop. Ins. Corp., 366 So. 3d 1130 (Fla. 3d DCA 2024)
- Flaherty v. Flaherty, 389 So. 3d 705 (Fla. 3d DCA 2025)