RICHARD W. GALEANO, APPELLANT,
v.
JACK ECKERD CORPORATION, A FLORIDA CORPORATION, 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 court held that the trial court properly granted summary judgment for the defendant because the defendant met the burden set forth in Rule 1.510.
[1] A summary judgment may be granted if the moving party demonstrates that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to a judgm…
[2] An appellate court will affirm a summary final judgment if the record, viewed in the light most favorable to the non-moving party, shows that the moving party adequately…
Previewing 2 of 3 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAppellant sued for accrued employee benefits allegedly due under an oral employment contract after being fired. The trial court granted the appellee's…
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 Employment Contract cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellant, plaintiff below, appeals orders of the trial court granting appellee’s, defendant below, motion for summary final judgment and denying appellant's motion for a rehearing.
Appellant filed a complaint in the circuit court seeking damages for accrued employee benefits allegedly due him pursuant to an oral employment contract with appel-lee by whom he was fired. Thereafter, appellee filed a motion for summary judgment which, after a hearing, was granted by the trial court in an order dated April 10, 1975. Appellant’s motion for a rehearing was then denied by the trial court in an order dated June 19, 1975. From the orders, appellant brings this appeal.
Appellant contends that the trial court erred as a matter of law in granting summary judgment for appellee and by denying its motion for a rehearing.
Rule 1.510, Florida Rules of Civil Procedure, 31 F.S.A., provides, inter alia, that a summary judgment may be granted “if the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories and admissions on file together with the affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law.” In reviewing the record, sub judice, in the light most favorable to appellant, we are of the opinion that appellee adequately carried the burden set forth in Rule 1.510 and that the trial court properly granted summary judgment in its favor. See, e. g., McGahee v. Dade County Board of Public Instruction, Fla.App.1973, 279 So. 2d 87; Biscayne Constr., Inc. v. Wesley Constr. Co., Fla. App.1973, 276 So. 2d 524; Brandeis v. Felcher, Fla.App.1968, 211 So. 2d 606; Mimaroe, Inc. v. Sanitary Service Co., Fla. App.1966, 185 So. 2d 177; and see 2 Fla. Jur., Appeals § 307.
We have considered the record, all points in the briefs, and arguments of’ counsel in the light of the controlling principles of law, and have concluded that no reversible error has been shown. Therefore, for the reasons stated and upon the authorities cited, the summary final judgment and the order denying the petition for rehearing are affirmed.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Sol Brandeis and Lona Brandeis v. Felcher, 211 So. 2d 606 (Fla. 3d DCA 1968)
- Biscayne Constr., Inc. v. Wesley Constr. Co., 276 So. 2d 524 (Fla. 3d DCA 1973)
- McGAHEE v. The Dade Cnty. Bd. OF Pub. Instruction, 279 So. 2d 87 (Fla. 3d DCA 1973)
- Mimaroe, Inc. v. Sanitary Serv. Co., 185 So. 2d 177 (Fla. 3d DCA 1966)