JOSEPH COBBS, JR., A MINOR, BY HIS NEXT FRIEND, JOSEPH COBBS AND JOSEPH COBBS, APPELLANTS,
v.
HARRY MOSEBACH, RICHARD C. BUSS AND MERCHANTS NATIONAL BANK OF ALLENTOWN AS CO-EXECUTORS OF THE ESTATE OF HATTIE S. SPECK, DECEASED, APPELLEES
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.
This case involves an appeal from a summary judgment in a personal injury lawsuit. The appellate court reversed the summary judgment, finding that genuine issues of material fact existed regarding the ownership of the vehicle that caused the accident.
Yes, the trial court erred in granting summary judgment because the record shows conflicts of material fact and varying inferences that must be resolved by a fact-finder.
“Appellant contends that the pleadings, depositions, affidavits and exhibits on file before the court establish genuine issues of material fact, and the trial court erred in holding that the appellees were entitled to judgment as a matter of law.”
This quote outlines the appellant's argument that the trial court improperly granted summary judgment by overlooking genuine factual disputes.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe plaintiff, a minor injured by an automobile driven by Harry Mosebach, sued the co-executors of Hattie Speck's estate. The plaintiff claimed Hattie…
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 Ownership Of Vehicle cases and more on FLexlaw
By this appeal, plaintiff brings up for review a summary final judgment entered by the circuit court in favor of the defendant, Richard C. Buss and Merchant’s National Bank of Allentown, as co-executors of the estate of Hattie S. Speck, deceased, in an action for damages alleged to have been caused by the driver of an automobile owned by Hattie S. Speck, deceased. The plaintiff was injured on October 3, 1962 when he was struck by an automobile driven by defendant-Harry X. Mosebach, the son of Hattie S. Speck, deceased.
Appellant contends that the pleadings, depositions, affidavits and exhibits on file before the court establish genuine issues of material fact, and the trial court erred in holding that the appellees were entitled to judgment as a matter of law.
The motion for summary judgment turned upon the question of who owned the vehicle involved on the date of the accident.
There are varying contentions, in that, plaintiff claims the ownership of the car *842was in Hattie S. Speck at the time of the accident, and the appellees contend that the ownership of the vehicle had passed to the defendant-Harry X. Mosebach1 and his wife.
Our inspection of the record reveals that there are conflicts of material fact as well as varying inferences which may be drawn therefrom,2 therefore, the trial court erred in granting appellees’ motion for summary judgment.
Accordingly the judgment appealed is reversed.
Reversed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
ST. John v. Michaels, 178 So. 2d 193 (Fla. 1965)…to be determined from the facts in evidence. The mere assertion by defendant that he sold the vehicle to Leilich, and Leilich’s assertion that he purchased the vehicle, are mere conclusions of law and of no probative effect.” In Cobbs v. Mosebach, 169 So. 2d 841 (Fla.App.3rd 1964), on substantially similar facts, summary judgment was reversed, the court holding: “The motion for summary judgment turned upon the question of who owned the vehicle involved on the date of the accident. “There are varying conte…
Authorities Cited
- Register v. Harris W. Redding, 126 So. 2d 289 (Fla. 1st DCA 1961)