VAREKA INVESTMENTS, N.V., APPELLANT,
v.
NATIONAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, APPELLEE
VAREKA INVESTMENTS, N.V., APPELLANT,
NATIONAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, APPELLEE
469 So. 2d 931
Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1985)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 1 case
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
The lease provision interpreted differently by the parties contains a latent ambiguity that may be resolved only by consideration of extrinsic evidence, which evidence is itself conflicting. Summary judgment is inappropriate notwithstanding that the case is to be tried before the same judge who may have considered the extrinsic evidence in entering summary judgment. See Morton v. Morton, 307 So. 2d 835, 839-40 (Fla. 3d DCA), cert. denied, 324 So. 2d 90 (Fla.1975).
Reversed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Contragolpe LLC v. 505 NE 30 St., LLC (Fla. 3d DCA 2025)…ile a trial court may sometimes consider extrinsic evidence to cure latent ambiguities at the summary judgment phase, if the extrinsic “evidence is itself conflicting, summary judgment is inappropriate.” Vareka Invs., N.V. v. Nat’l Life Ins. Co., 469 So. 2d 931, 931 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985) (cleaned up); see also Mac-Gray Servs., Inc. v. Savannah Assocs. of Sarasota, LLC, 915 So. 2d 657, 660 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005) (“The addendum thus contains a latent ambiguity, which required the consideration of parol evidence…
Authorities Cited
- Morton v. Emil Morton, 307 So. 2d 835 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975)
- Roberts v. State, 324 So. 2d 90 (Fla. 1975)