TED CARLON, APPELLANT,
v.
LEVITZ FURNITURE CORPORATION, A PENNSYLVANIA CORPORATION, APPELLEE
TED CARLON, APPELLANT,
LEVITZ FURNITURE CORPORATION, A PENNSYLVANIA CORPORATION, APPELLEE
374 So. 2d 1156
Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1979)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
The trial court erred in entering summary final judgment against the appellant on the ground that his cause of action for conversion was barred by the statute of limitations. We find that there was a material issue of disputed fact regarding when the appellant’s cause of action accrued. This issue should not have been resolved through summary judgment but was exclusively for the trier of fact to determine. See Hart v. Hart, 234 So. 2d 393 (Fla. 1st DCA 1970).
Reversed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Phillip and Delores Floyd v. Homes Beautiful Constr. Co., 710 So. 2d 177 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998)…es; or rather, whether that modifying language limits the release to causes of action fully accrued at the time of execution. Furthermore, there is a question as to when the instant cause of action accrued. Compare, Carlon v. Levitz Furniture Corp., 374 So. 2d 1156 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979)(summary judgment erroneous because there was a dispute as to when the cause of action accrued), and Hart v. Hart, 234 So. 2d 393 (Fla. 1st DCA 1970)(summary judgment erroneous because there was a genuine issue of material fact as…
Authorities Cited
- Hart v. Kenneth H. Hart and his wife, 234 So. 2d 393 (Fla. 1st DCA 1970)