HART MOBILE HOMES CORPORATION, APPELLANT,

v.

WILLIAM C. SPENCER ET AL., APPELLEES

Citator

Cited By

• State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Statsick, 231 So. 3d 528 (Fla. 2d DCA 2017)
  …. Given the limited scope of the summary judgment inquiry and record, the trial court was not in a position to make a finding of fact that conclusively resolved whether a meeting of the minds supported the stipulated judgment.4 See Horner v. State, 158 So. 2d 789, 790 (Fla. 3d DCA 1963) (“The very nature of the rule which permits summary judgments, which recites thqt they may be entered when ‘there is no genuine issue as to any material fact’ indicates that it is not the function of a trial judge to make fin…
• Horner v. State, 162 So. 2d 904 (Fla. 1963)
  …Certiorari denied without opinion. 158 So. 2d 789.…
• Newman v. Shore, 206 So. 2d 279 (Fla. 3d DCA 1968)
  …ecification is not required. This court has previously ruled upon this precise point and has held that there is no duty imposed upon a trial judge to set forth findings and conclusions in a summary final judgment. Horner v. State (Fla.App. 3, 1963) 158 So. 2d 789. A careful reading of Rule 1.36 Florida Rules of Civil Procedure, 30 F.S.A. fails to reveal any such requirement except when, under sub-division (d), the case is not fully adjudicated on motion for summary judgment. Obviously if a case is not fully…