ALDO BARSOTTI, APPELLANT,
v.
OSCAR JAFFE, APPELLEE
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 Florida District Court of Appeal reversed a summary judgment, holding that the validity of service of process on the appellant was a genuine issue of material fact that required an evidentiary hearing. The case involved enforcing a New York judgment, and the appellant argued the New York court lacked personal jurisdiction.
Yes, the validity of the alleged service upon the appellant was a genuine issue of material fact that was not resolved by the affidavits, thus summary judgment was improper.
“This appeal questions the correctness of a summary judgment rendered in favor of the appellee, who was the plaintiff in the trial court.”
Establishes the nature of the appeal and the lower court's decision being reviewed.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe appellee, plaintiff in the trial court, sought to enforce a New York judgment against the appellant. The appellant argued the New York judgment wa…
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 Enforcement Of Foreign Judgment cases and more on FLexlaw
This appeal questions the correctness of a summary judgment rendered in favor of the appellee, who was the plaintiff in the trial court. The appellee filed a complaint *28to enforce a judgment entered against the appellant in a court in the State of New York. The appellant’s answer asserted that the New York judgment was void because the New York court never had personal jurisdiction over him. Affidavits were filed by each party. We reverse.
The record on appeal fails to demonstrate that a material fact — the validity of the alleged service upon the appellant— was not genuinely in issue. See Harvey Building, Inc. v. Haley, Fla.1965, 175 So.2d 780; Holl v. Talcott, Fla.1966, 191 So.2d 40; Visingardi v. Tirone, Fla.1967, 193 So.2d 601.
This cause is remanded to the trial court for the purpose of receiving evidence on the issues raised by the pleadings and rendition of a final judgment thereon.
Reversed and remanded with directions.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Gory Roofing Tile Mfg., Inc. v. Davison, 191 So. 2d 40 (Fla. 1966)
- Visingardi v. Tirone, 193 So. 2d 601 (Fla. 1966)
- Holland Paving Co., Inc. v. Dann, 175 So. 2d 780 (Fla. 1965)
- Harvey Bldg., Inc. v. Ocie M. Haley, 175 So. 2d 780 (Fla. 1965)