Burden Of Proof In Summary Judgment

673 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Williams v. Sears
  866 So. 2d 122· Fla. 4th DCA· 2004-02-11 ·cited 3×
  In this slip-and-fall negligence case, the court affirmed summary judgment for Sears, finding that the plaintiff failed to establish any genuine issue of material fact regarding whether a foreign substance on the floor caused her fall. The plaintiff's inability to identify what s
• Debrecht v. Osceola Cnty.
  243 F. Supp. 2d 1364· M.D. Fla.· 2003-02-07 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the plaintiffs, as Battalion Chiefs, were exempt from FLSA overtime provisions because they qualified as bona fide executive and administrative employees, and their retaliation claim failed due to lack of causation.
• McGOWAN v. Miami-Dade Cnty.
  724 So. 2d 683· Fla. 3d DCA· 1999-01-20 ·cited 3×
  The court reversed summary judgment against McGowan on his breach of contract claim against Miami-Dade County because a material factual dispute existed regarding whether the County failed to remove documents from his personnel files as required by the agreement.
• Barnes v. Cochran
  944 F. Supp. 897· S.D. Fla.· 1996-08-18 ·cited 3×
  The court held that while the defendant's pre-employment psychological examination violated the ADA, the plaintiff failed to show discriminatory intent or resulting damages, and thus only an injunction was granted for that violation. The court also granted summary judgment for th
• Pilkington v. United Airlines, Inc.
  921 F. Supp. 740· M.D. Fla.· 1996-03-27 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the plaintiffs' RICO claim was barred by the statute of limitations and that the state law claims were preempted by the Railway Labor Act.
• Underwriters AT Lloyds v. VIP Distribs., Inc.
  629 So. 2d 291· Fla. 3d DCA· 1993-12-21 ·cited 3×
  Underwriters at Lloyds, London appealed a summary judgment in favor of VIP Distributors regarding a denied insurance claim for missing perfume cargo. The court reversed, finding that material factual disputes existed regarding whether the goods were actually loaded onto the aircr
• Kutrom Corp. v. City OF Ctr. Line
  979 F.2d 1171· 6th Cir.· 1992-11-18 ·cited 3×
  The court held that a city ordinance regulating massage parlors is presumptively valid under the rational basis test, and the challenger bears the burden of proving its unreasonableness.
• Colony Creek, Ltd. v. Resolution Tr. Corp.
  941 F.2d 1323· 5th Cir.· 1991-09-19 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the RTC proved all elements for enforcing the promissory note and that the note was not usurious, affirming the grant of summary judgment.
• White v. McDONNELL Douglas Corp. & McDonnell Douglas Aircraft
  904 F.2d 456· 8th Cir.· 1990-06-01 ·cited 3×
  The court held that summary judgment was appropriate because the plaintiff failed to respond to the motion and designate specific facts showing a genuine dispute of material fact.
• Matia v. Carpet Transp., Inc.
  888 F.2d 118· 11th Cir.· 1989-11-14 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the insurer was not estopped from denying coverage because it did not defend the insured and the plaintiffs' reliance on coverage was unjustified given the insurer's answer.
• Robinson v. Caulkins Indiantown Citrus Co.
  701 F. Supp. 208· S.D. Fla.· 1988-11-15 ·cited 3×
  The court held that summary judgment is granted for § 1981 claims due to statute of limitations, but denied for Rene-Fitzgerald's Title VII claim due to a genuine issue of material fact regarding the posting of EEOC notices.
• Emil Lee Rubley and Edna Rubley v. Keene Corp.
  480 So. 2d 675· Fla. 1st DCA· 1985-12-17 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the defendants, in moving for summary judgment, failed to affirmatively demonstrate the absence of a genuine issue of material fact regarding exposure to their asbestos products.
• DeMAGGIO v. Brasserie Rest. & Coconut Grove Hotel
  320 So. 2d 49· Fla. 3d DCA· 1975-10-14 ·cited 3×
  Summary judgment for restaurant defendants affirmed where patron injured by another patron failed to establish genuine issues of material fact regarding premises liability.
• Travelers Prop. Cas. Co. of Am. v. Ocean Reef Charters LLC
  396 F. Supp. 3d 1170· S.D. Fla.· 2021-10-26 ·cited 2×
  Defendant's breach of captain and crew warranties did not increase the hazard, thus coverage for the sunken yacht is not precluded, and the insurer wrongfully denied the claim.
• Mario Vitelli AND Carol Bartholomew v. Emil Hagger and Caroline Hagger
  268 So. 3d 246· Fla. 5th DCA· 2019-04-12 ·cited 2×
  Summary judgment was improper because the Haggers' verified complaint contained only conclusory allegations tracking statutory language without articulating the planned use, describing how the parcel was hemmed in, or providing evidence such as photographs, maps, or surveys to su
• Volvo Aero Leasing, LLC v. Vas Aero Servs., LLC
  268 So. 3d 785· Fla. 4th DCA· 2019-03-13 ·cited 2×
  H.I.G. Capital was not liable for tortious interference because it was not a stranger to the business relationship between VAL and VAS, as H.I.G. indirectly owned and directly controlled VAS with significant financial interests. Summary judgment on damages was proper where VAS fa
• Raissi v. Valente
  247 So. 3d 629· Fla. 2d DCA· 2018-05-16 ·cited 2×
  Summary judgment on a negligence counterclaim was improper where the movant relied exclusively on deposition testimony showing only that the non-movant lacked documentation at the time of deposition, without demonstrating that the non-movant could never prove his case or that no
• Wilmington Tr. v. Rolland A. Moon
  238 So. 3d 425· Fla. 5th DCA· 2018-02-23 ·cited 2×
  The court held that summary judgment was improper because a genuine issue of material fact existed regarding Wilmington Trust's standing to foreclose.
• Peterson v. Flare Fittings, Inc.
  177 So. 3d 651· Fla. 5th DCA· 2015-10-09 ·cited 2×
  Owen Peterson appealed summary judgment orders granted in favor of Disney, Flare Fittings, and Crossfire Paintball after he was injured by a large balloon at an event. The Fifth District Court of Appeal reversed, finding that Disney's post-claim waiver was ambiguous and failed to
• Miccosukee Tribe OF Indians OF Florida v. Lewis
  165 So. 3d 9· Fla. 3d DCA· 2015-03-25 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the tribe's lawsuit against its Florida lawyers was not barred by tribal sovereignty and that the trial court properly granted summary judgment for the lawyers due to the tribe's failure to present evidence of fraud or excessive billing.
• Sample v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
  150 So. 3d 1191· Fla. 4th DCA· 2014-11-12 ·cited 2×
  A borrower appealed a summary judgment of foreclosure, arguing the trial court erred by entering judgment despite fourteen affirmative defenses. The court reversed, finding that one affirmative defense regarding a missing legal description in the mortgage created a genuine issue
• Nowicki v. The Cessna Aircraft Co.
  69 So. 3d 406· Fla. 4th DCA· 2011-09-21 ·cited 2×
  The estate of a passenger who died in a Cessna aircraft crash sued the manufacturer for a defective passenger seat. The court affirmed summary judgment dismissing the suit as time-barred by the 18-year statute of repose in the General Aviation Revitalization Act (GARA), finding t
• Selby v. Yacht Starship, Inc.
  624 F. Supp. 2d 1367· M.D. Fla.· 2008-08-20 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the plaintiff's duties aboard the vessel, including general cleaning and maintenance, qualified as service rendered primarily as an aid in the operation of the vessel as a means of transportation, thus falling under the seaman exemption to the FLSA's overtime
• Magee v. Am. S. Home Ins. Co.
  982 So. 2d 1255· Fla. 1st DCA· 2008-06-02 ·cited 2×
  The court held that summary judgment was improper because the insurance company failed to provide competent evidence that the policy was properly cancelled before the loss occurred. The court also granted attorney's fees to the appellant.
• Halifax Paving, Inc. v. United States Fire Ins.
  481 F. Supp. 2d 1331· M.D. Fla.· 2007-04-06 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the letter agreement between Halifax and VCC constituted payment for the invoices, and therefore U.S. Fire, as surety, was not liable on the payment bond for those amounts.
• Jeannine Gerard v. Eckerd Corp.
  895 So. 2d 436· Fla. 4th DCA· 2005-01-12 ·cited 2×
  Gerard was injured in a slip and fall on a clear liquid in an Eckerd drugstore aisle. The trial court granted summary judgment for Eckerd based on a store manager's testimony that he had inspected the aisle ten minutes before the accident, but the appellate court reversed, holdin
• Lane v. Cold
  882 So. 2d 436· Fla. 1st DCA· 2004-08-30 ·cited 2×
  Gary Lane appeals a summary judgment dismissing his legal malpractice action against attorney Kathleen Holbrook Cold for failing to prepare a buy-sell agreement for a corporation. The court affirmed, holding that Lane presented no evidence that Cold was retained or agreed to prep
• McKENNA v. Camino Real Vill. Ass'n, Inc.
  877 So. 2d 900· Fla. 4th DCA· 2004-07-21 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial court erred in granting summary judgment because the association failed to conclusively establish it complied with its own notice and procedural requirements for accelerating assessments.
• Winner FL, LLC v. Apac-Florida, Inc.
  869 So. 2d 631· Fla. 5th DCA· 2004-03-26 ·cited 2×
  Summary judgment was improper because genuine issues of material fact remain regarding the construction of an island, the timing of paving, water pooling and flooding, and damaged water lines.
• McCurry v. Moore
  242 F. Supp. 2d 1167· N.D. Fla.· 2002-11-21 ·cited 2×
  The court adopted the magistrate judge's report and recommendation, granting summary judgment in favor of Defendants Moore and Franklin on certain claims and denying it in others, remanding the case for further proceedings.
• Murray v. World Sav. Bank
  215 F. Supp. 2d 1316· S.D. Fla.· 2002-08-07 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the defendant's pay differential was based on a legitimate, non-discriminatory factor (experience) and not a pretext for sex discrimination under the Equal Pay Act.
• Sabas Flores Morales and Justina Leone Morales v. The Coca-Cola Co.
  813 So. 2d 162· Fla. 4th DCA· 2002-03-13 ·cited 2×
  Sabas Flores Morales was injured when a goat truck registered to Coca-Cola went out of control and flipped. Under Florida's dangerous instrumentality doctrine, Coca-Cola was sued as the record title owner. The court reversed summary judgment for Coca-Cola because the company fail
• Glasspoole v. Konover Constr. Corp. S.
  787 So. 2d 937· Fla. 4th DCA· 2001-05-30 ·cited 2×
  Victor Glasspoole, an employee of a construction subcontractor, appealed a summary judgment dismissing his personal injury claim against the general contractor Konover Construction. The court affirmed the summary judgment, holding that Glasspoole failed to present counter-evidenc
• Dempsey v. LAW Firm OF Cauthen & Odham, P.A.
  781 So. 2d 1141· Fla. 5th DCA· 2001-03-02 ·cited 2×
  Dempsey appeals summary judgments in favor of a law firm and individual defendants who allegedly prevented him from executing on a judgment. The court affirmed the summary judgments, finding that uncontroverted evidence showed the sheriff canceled the sale due to a court order, n
• Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Glenna Boertlein
  775 So. 2d 345· Fla. 2d DCA· 2000-09-29 ·cited 2×
  Wal-Mart appeals a summary judgment finding it liable for injuries sustained by Glenna Boertlein when a box fell and struck her in the store. The appellate court affirms, holding that Wal-Mart failed to contest the facts and thus liability was established as a matter of law.
• Forcier v. City OF ST. Petersburg
  732 So. 2d 35· Fla. 2d DCA· 1999-04-30 ·cited 2×
  Vera Forcier sued the City of St. Petersburg for injuries sustained in a fall on a sidewalk, claiming the City had a duty to maintain it. The City obtained summary judgment based on an affidavit asserting that the Department of Transportation maintained the sidewalk as State Road
• Sasson v. The Rockwell Mfg. Co. a foreign corp.
  715 So. 2d 1066· Fla. 3d DCA· 1998-08-05 ·cited 2×
  Appellants Salvador and Morena Sasson appealed a summary judgment dismissing their products liability action based on Florida's repealed statute of repose. The appellate court reversed, holding that the defendants failed to conclusively establish the table saw's original delivery
• Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. J.W. Korth & Co.
  991 F. Supp. 1468· S.D. Fla.· 1998-01-21 ·cited 2×
  The court granted summary judgment for the SEC, permanently enjoining the defendants from violating securities laws and imposing monetary penalties for their failure to produce required records.
• Bledsoe v. Palm Beach Soil & Water Conservation Dist.
  942 F. Supp. 1439· S.D. Fla.· 1996-10-17 ·cited 2×
  A broad release signed in a workers' compensation settlement bars subsequent claims under the ADA and Rehabilitation Act, and Title II of the ADA does not create a cause of action for employment discrimination.
• Perry & Co. v. Union Am. Ins. Co.
  664 So. 2d 1036· Fla. 3d DCA· 1995-11-15 ·cited 2×
  The court held that summary judgment was improperly entered for some policies because genuine issues of material fact remained, despite the untimeliness of the appellants' counteraffidavit.
• Zaleski v. Woessner
  659 So. 2d 716· Fla. 5th DCA· 1995-09-01 ·cited 2×
  Zaleski appeals from a partial summary judgment awarding damages under Florida's bad check statute (§68.065) for two dishonored checks. The court reverses, holding that the statute only applies to validly delivered instruments and that Zaleski raised a material factual issue rega
• Levine v. Constitution Bank
  640 So. 2d 1202· Fla. 2d DCA· 1994-08-03 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the party moving for summary judgment failed to demonstrate conclusively that the nonmoving party cannot prevail, and genuine issues of material fact remain.
• Guarino v. Brookfield Twp. Trs.
  980 F.2d 399· 6th Cir.· 1992-11-25 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a district court is not required to search the entire record for genuine issues of material fact when the non-moving party fails to respond to a summary judgment motion, and affirmed the grant of summary judgment.
• Deutsch v. Burlington N. R.R. Co.
  983 F.2d 741· 7th Cir.· 1992-09-21 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to present sufficient evidence to create a genuine issue of material fact regarding the railroad's negligence, and thus summary judgment was properly granted. The court also held that the plaintiff's procedural due process claim regarding
• Colon v. Operation S., Inc.
  597 So. 2d 364· Fla. 3d DCA· 1992-04-14 ·cited 2×
  Minor Jonathan Colon was injured when a barge shifted and crushed his hand while he attempted to board a restaurant located on a barge at Haulover Park. The court reversed summary judgment for La Morra Marina, finding genuine issues of material fact regarding whether La Morra was
• Cocoa Props., Inc. v. Commonwealth Land Title Ins. Co.
  590 So. 2d 989· Fla. 2d DCA· 1991-12-04 ·cited 2×
  Cocoa Properties challenges a summary judgment in favor of Commonwealth Land Title Insurance Company regarding a title insurance policy. The court reverses, finding that a genuine issue of material fact exists regarding whether Commonwealth removed a mortgage defect within a reas
• Adler v. Madigan
  939 F.2d 476· 7th Cir.· 1991-08-08 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the plaintiff was not entitled to backpay from the date he was denied the SGC position, as that denial was not a result of protected activity.
• Williams v. Beckham & McALILEY, P.A.
  582 So. 2d 1206· Fla. 2d DCA· 1991-06-19 ·cited 2×
  In this legal malpractice case, the Williams family challenged summary judgment in favor of law firm Beckham & McAliley, claiming the firm negligently failed to investigate and prosecute their wrongful death claim arising from their daughter's fatal automobile accident. The court
• Campbell v. Smith
  571 So. 2d 91· Fla. 2d DCA· 1990-12-14 ·cited 2×
  The court held that summary judgment was improperly granted because material issues of fact remained regarding settlement and damages.
• United States v. Carter
  906 F.2d 1375· 9th Cir.· 1990-07-03 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the appeal was timely because the judgment was not entered on a separate document as required by rule, and affirmed summary judgment for the government on the erroneous refund claim and res judicata defense.