TAMPA ELECTRIC COMPANY, A FLORIDA CORPORATION, APPELLANT,
v.
FLORIDA POWER CORPORATION, A FLORIDA CORPORATION, APPELLEE
Appellant appeals a final summary judgment entered against it in a suit arising out of a written contract.
The able trial judge, after taking voluminous testimony, ruled that the contract was not ambiguous and therefore refused to consider the parol evidence.
We hold that the contract itself was ambiguous in its terms and upon considering the parol evidence genuine issues of material fact as to the correct interpretation of the language of the contract were created. This being the case, it was error to enter a final summary judgment.
Reversed and remanded.
PIERCE, C. J., and HOBSON, J., concur.
McNULTY, J., dissents with opinion.
(dissenting).
I must respectfully dissent. There are no latent ambiguities in the contract herein, when read as a whole, which would render its terms amenable to parol for clarification.
McNULTY, Judge
(dissenting).
I must respectfully dissent. There are no latent ambiguities in the contract herein, when read as a whole, which would render its terms amenable to parol for clarification.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Griffin Builders Supply, Inc. v. Jones, 384 So. 2d 265 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980)…l payment in full” imply general release. We have held that an ambiguous contract creates genuine issues of material fact as to the correct interpretation of the contract, thus precluding summary judgment. Tampa Electric Co. v. Florida Power Corp., 267 So. 2d 110 (Fla. 2d DCA 1972). See Buckel Corp. v. Fidelity & Deposit Co. of Maryland, 370 So. 2d 824 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979). When the wording of an agreement is ambiguous and parties suggest different interpretations, the issue of proper interpretation becomes on…
-
Fla. Power Corp. v. Tampa Elec. Co., 273 So. 2d 762 (Fla. 1973)…Certiorari denied. 267 So. 2d 110. ROBERTS, Acting C. J., and ERVIN, BOYD, McCAIN and DEKLE, JJ., concur.…