Burden Of Proof In Summary Judgment

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

• Pachaly v. City OF Lynchburg
  897 F.2d 723· 4th Cir.· 1990-03-02 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a jury could reasonably find that the search exceeded the warrant's scope and that the prosecutor may not be entitled to absolute immunity if investigating crimes beyond the indictment.
• Balun v. Tucci
  549 So. 2d 257· Fla. 2d DCA· 1989-09-29 ·cited 2×
• USA Rookwood Corp. v. Atl. Richfield Co.
  888 F.2d 846· Temp. Emer. Ct. App.· 1989-09-26 ·cited 2×
  The court held that Rookwood's claims were barred by the statute of limitations because they arose from initial acts with continuing effects, not separate daily violations, and that summary judgment was proper on the No. 2 distillate claim due to insufficient evidence of material
• Universal Title Ins. Co. v. NCNB Nat'l Bank OF Fla.
  532 So. 2d 736· Fla. 2d DCA· 1988-09-28 ·cited 2×
  Universal Title Insurance Company appeals a partial summary judgment in favor of NCNB National Bank of Florida regarding Universal's liability under a title insurance commitment. The court reversed, holding that NCNB failed to overcome Universal's affirmative defense that NCNB ha
• Howell v. Brock
  530 So. 2d 473· Fla. 5th DCA· 1988-09-01 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the plaintiff's affidavit in support of summary judgment was insufficient to negate the defendant's affirmative defenses and counterclaims, thus creating triable issues of fact.
• Scutieri v. Est. of Revitz
  683 F. Supp. 795· S.D. Fla.· 1988-04-12 ·cited 2×
  The court held that genuine issues of material fact precluded summary judgment on most counts, denying motions for the Southeast Defendants and granting them for Paige and Fernandez on specific RICO claims.
• Ward v. The Celotex Corp.
  479 So. 2d 294· Fla. 1st DCA· 1985-12-10 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the depositions did not establish the absence of a genuine issue of material fact regarding exposure to the predecessor's asbestos products.
• Tampa Port Auth. v. Tampa Barge Servs., Inc.
  463 So. 2d 557· Fla. 2d DCA· 1985-02-15 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial court properly entered summary judgment resolving an ambiguous lease term regarding rent calculation.
• Bengyak v. Rosin
  437 So. 2d 220· Fla. 4th DCA· 1983-09-14 ·cited 2×
  In this promissory note collection case, the trial court erred in granting summary judgment to the creditor Rosin when the debtor Bengyak raised a genuine affirmative defense of release. The appellate court reversed, holding that the trial court failed to apply the proper burden-
• Brady v. Steyr-Daimler-Puch A.G. Werke Graz Austria & Steyr-Daimler-Puch of Am. Corp.
  429 So. 2d 1348· Fla. 2d DCA· 1983-04-20 ·cited 2×
  John Brady purchased a moped that allegedly had a defective throttle assembly that stuck, causing him to collide with a utility pole and suffer injuries. The trial court granted summary judgment for the manufacturer and distributor defendants on all counts, but the appellate cour
• Yosemite Park & Curry Co. v. The United States
  686 F.2d 925· Ct. Cl.· 1982-08-11 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the National Park Service's (NPS) comparative-rate system for charging concessioners for electricity was reasonable and permissible under the contract and relevant statutes and regulations.
• Campbell v. Sands
  404 So. 2d 402· Fla. 5th DCA· 1981-10-07 ·cited 2×
  Appellants sought rescission of a lease and option to purchase based on alleged fraudulent misrepresentation of income and expense figures for a tomato farming operation. The trial court granted summary judgment for defendants, but the appellate court reversed, holding that genui
• Sandles v. Sheridan Lakes Condo., Inc.
  388 So. 2d 1096· Fla. 4th DCA· 1980-10-08 ·cited 2×
  Condominium unit owners appealed a summary judgment foreclosing a lien for a painting assessment. The court reversed because the condominium association failed to provide evidence sufficient to overcome the unit owners' affirmative defenses regarding the Board's decision-making p
• Commercial Union Ins. Co. & Otis Elevator Co. v. Bayfront Med. Ctr.
  363 So. 2d 1124· Fla. 2d DCA· 1978-10-11 ·cited 2×
  The court held that summary judgment was properly granted on the contribution claim but improperly granted on the indemnity claim due to genuine issues of material fact regarding active versus passive negligence.
• Harrell v. Fla. First Nat'l Bank OF Jacksonville
  354 So. 2d 420· Fla. 1st DCA· 1978-01-20 ·cited 2×
  Merely listing 'depositions' in a summary judgment motion without offering the deposition into evidence or referencing it in oral argument does not constitute 'use' of the deposition and therefore does not waive the Dead Man's Statute.
• Jerry Lampert Real Est., Inc. v. Franklin
  349 So. 2d 825· Fla. 3d DCA· 1977-09-13 ·cited 2×
  Real estate brokers appealed a summary judgment entered in favor of purchasers in a dispute over a claimed brokerage commission. The brokers alleged they were the procuring cause of a sale but were defrauded through conspiracy by the purchasers and seller. The court reversed, fin
• Freedom Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n v. Yakle Lumber Yard
  343 So. 2d 113· Fla. 2d DCA· 1977-03-11 ·cited 2×
  Freedom Federal Savings and Loan Association appeals from a summary judgment establishing mechanics' lien priority over its mortgage. The court reversed, holding that the trial court improperly excluded a timely affidavit, misallocated the burden of proof on the summary judgment
• Hardemon v. Fish
  325 So. 2d 411· Fla. 3d DCA· 1976-01-20 ·cited 2×
  Hardemon sought to cancel a deed allegedly executed by a grantor under the undue influence of grantee Fish. The trial court granted Fish's motion for summary judgment, but the appellate court reversed, finding that the trial judge improperly considered an affidavit from Fish's co
• Davis v. 7-Eleven Food Stores, Inc.
  294 So. 2d 111· Fla. 1st DCA· 1974-03-26 ·cited 2×
  James Ronald Davis appealed a summary judgment dismissing his malicious prosecution suit against 7-Eleven Food Stores and employee Goldie Daugherty. Daugherty had identified Davis as the robber in a photograph and sworn out a warrant, but the criminal proceeding was ultimately di
• Smith v. Cont'l Ins. Co.
  281 So. 2d 393· Fla. 2d DCA· 1973-08-15 ·cited 2×
  Smith sued for injuries from a fallen lighting fixture at a hotel, naming the installer and its insurer as defendants. The insurer obtained summary judgment despite the absence of evidence contradicting the existence of an insurance policy, and the appellate court reversed, holdi
• Zephyr Cove Lodge, Inc. v. The First Nat'l Bank OF Nev. with Will Annexed of the Est. of George Whittell, Jr.
  478 F.2d 1121· 9th Cir.· 1973-04-27 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the movant failed to demonstrate the absence of a genuine issue of material fact regarding the interpretation of a lease's first refusal clause.
• BAY Mach. & Boat Works, Inc. v. Ray-Brooks Mach. Co., Inc.
  256 So. 2d 270· Fla. 1st DCA· 1971-12-30 ·cited 2×
  Bay Machine and Boat Works appeals a summary judgment in favor of Ray-Brooks Machinery Company in a third-party negligence action. Bay sought to hold Ray-Brooks liable for damages to a diesel engine allegedly caused by Ray-Brooks' negligent adjustment of fuel injectors and valves
• 2361 State Corp. v. Sealy, Inc.
  402 F.2d 370· 7th Cir.· 1968-10-14 ·cited 2×
  The court held that genuine issues of material fact existed regarding violations of Section 1 of the Sherman Act and damages, precluding summary judgment.
• Mintzer v. Dade Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n OF Miami
  212 So. 2d 319· Fla. 3d DCA· 1968-07-02 ·cited 2×
  In this mortgage foreclosure case, the trial court granted summary final decrees of foreclosure to Dade Federal Savings & Loan and Irving Industries against defendants including Jack Mintzer and Ethel Chisling. The appellants challenged the decree on appeal, claiming genuine issu
• Gen. Fire & Cas. Co. v. Bent
  204 So. 2d 38· Fla. 1st DCA· 1967-11-07 ·cited 2×
  General Fire and Casualty Company appeals a summary judgment awarding policyholders damages for stolen personal property. The court affirms, holding that the insurance company's failure to submit contradictory evidence or affidavits disputing the appraisals justified summary judg
• Emil Biro v. Geiser
  193 So. 2d 51· Fla. 1st DCA· 1966-12-22 ·cited 2×
  The appellate court affirmed a summary judgment for the defendants, holding that the plaintiff failed to demonstrate genuine issues of material fact after the defendants met their burden of proof.
• Gertrude Doroff and James Doroff v. Food Fair Stores
  177 So. 2d 749· Fla. 3d DCA· 1965-08-10 ·cited 2×
  The Florida District Court of Appeal reversed a summary judgment in favor of a supermarket and soda bottler in a negligence action brought by a wife injured by falling soda bottles. The court held that the defendants failed to meet their initial burden of presenting sufficient ev
• Izquierdo v. Universal Ins. Co. of N. Am.
  Fla. 3d DCA· 2026-03-04 ·cited 1×
  Mario Izquierdo appeals a summary judgment dismissing his homeowners insurance claim for cracking damage to his home caused by blasting vibrations from a nearby rock quarry. The Third District reversed, finding genuine disputes of material fact exist regarding whether the damage
• Perrin v. State
  421 So. 3d 755· Fla. 3d DCA· 2025-08-27 ·cited 1×
  Because Perrin failed to demonstrate that she or her predecessors ever obtained an easement interest in the property, the Marketable Record Title Act extinguished any claimed interest, and no statutory exception to MRTA applied to preserve her alleged rights.
• Nation Sec., LLC v. Everest Nat'l Ins. Co.
  48 Fla. L. Weekly D2142· Fla. 3d DCA· 2024-02-28 ·cited 1×
  Summary judgment on a breach of contract claim requires that the underlying contract documents be part of the record; an insurer's failure to attach or present the insurance policies in support of summary judgment on a breach of contract claim requires reversal, even if invoices
• Sterling Mirror Co., LLC v. THE Jordon Glass Corp.
  Fla. 3d DCA· 2022-06-22 ·cited 1×
  Summary judgment was properly entered when the moving party demonstrated entitlement to judgment as a matter of law and the opposing party failed to demonstrate that genuine and material issues remained for trial.
• Cleveland v. Westport Recovery Corp.
  331 So. 3d 728· Fla. 4th DCA· 2021-12-08 ·cited 1×
  Westport Recovery Corporation sued Deborah Strong and her son Richard Cleveland under Florida's Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act, alleging that Strong's sale of the 1906 Property to Cleveland for $100 was a fraudulent conveyance intended to hinder collection on Westport's judgment
• Hicks v. Keebler
  312 So. 3d 1001· Fla. 2d DCA· 2021-02-12 ·cited 1×
  The appellate court reviewed a lower court's decision to grant summary judgment based on the statute of limitations. The court found that there was a genuine issue of material fact regarding when the statute of limitations began to run for a contract with an unspecified delivery
• United Servs. Auto. Ass'n v. Velez
  305 So. 3d 682· Fla. 3d DCA· 2020-05-06 ·cited 1×
  The appellate court reversed a lower court's decision that granted summary judgment in favor of the insured, Rafael Velez. The court found that the insurance company, USAA, had fulfilled its contractual obligations by paying the claim and the subsequent appraisal award, and the i
• Danna Suarez and Rolando Suarez v. Wells Fargo Bank
  201 So. 3d 694· Fla. 4th DCA· 2016-08-24 ·cited 1×
  The Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed a summary judgment of mortgage foreclosure because the lender, Wells Fargo, failed to present evidence refuting the borrowers' affirmative defense that Wells Fargo did not comply with the notice requirement of paragraph 22 of the mortg
• Sanchez v. Soleil Builders, Inc.
  98 So. 3d 251· Fla. 5th DCA· 2012-10-05 ·cited 1×
  Sanchez appeals summary judgments and a foreclosure judgment entered by the trial court in a lien foreclosure action brought by Soleil Builders. The appellate court reversed because the trial court improperly bifurcated the proceedings by entering partial summary judgment on the
• Kirk v. TJ Palm Beach Assocs. Ltd. P'ship
  976 So. 2d 694· Fla. 4th DCA· 2008-03-19 ·cited 1×
• Bashir v. United States
  506 F. Supp. 2d 1178· M.D. Fla.· 2007-06-14 ·cited 1×
  The court denied the defendant's motion to dismiss based on untimeliness, finding the complaint was filed within the statute of limitations due to the mailbox rule, but deferred ruling on the applicability of the FTCA's § 2680(c) exception pending a Supreme Court decision.
• Schvaneveldt v. Mastec N. Am., Inc.
  306 F. Supp. 2d 1177· S.D. Fla.· 2004-02-18 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the defendant did not breach the contract by maintaining stock transfer restrictions because the plaintiffs failed to provide satisfactory evidence that the restrictions were no longer required, as stipulated by the agreement.
• Molloy v. Allied Van Lines, Inc.
  267 F. Supp. 2d 1246· M.D. Fla.· 2003-05-28 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the plaintiff's claim letters met the minimum requirements for a determinable amount of money, and his failure to pay shipping charges did not bar his claim for lost or damaged goods.
• Simmons v. Conseco Life Ins.
  170 F. Supp. 2d 1215· M.D. Fla.· 2001-04-23 ·cited 1×
  Summary judgment for the insurer is granted because the insured's misrepresentations regarding his felony convictions were material to the risk assumed, even under a 'knowledge and belief' standard.
• Sheets v. Fla. E. Coast Ry. Co.
  132 F. Supp. 2d 1031· S.D. Fla.· 2001-02-09 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case under the Americans with Disabilities Act because he could perform the essential functions of his job as an engineer with or without accommodation, and the prior arrangement was not a required reasonable acc
• Comer v. City of Palm Bay
  171 F. Supp. 2d 1307· M.D. Fla.· 2000-05-19 ·cited 1×
  Summary judgment was granted for the defendant as to plaintiff Palmer due to his failure to present evidence of a genuine issue of material fact, but denied as to plaintiff Comer, who presented sufficient evidence.
• Wilkes v. United States
  50 F. Supp. 2d 1281· M.D. Fla.· 1999-03-09 ·cited 1×
  The court held that 26 U.S.C. § 2210(a)(3) provides a complete discharge of the estate's liability for estate taxes assumed by an employee stock ownership plan (ESOP).
• Travelodge Hotels, Inc. v. Kim Shin Hospitality, Inc.
  27 F. Supp. 2d 1377· M.D. Fla.· 1998-12-02 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the defendant breached the license agreement by failing to make periodic payments and that the liquidated damages provision was enforceable under California law.
• Pinkerton v. City of Tampa
  981 F. Supp. 1455· M.D. Fla.· 1997-10-21 ·cited 1×
  Summary judgment is inappropriate because material issues of fact remain regarding whether the city regarded the plaintiff as disabled, whether she was qualified for her position, and whether reasonable accommodations could have been made.
• All Underwriters at Lloyd's (London) Subscribing to Policy No. 200-451-7275 v. Kenney
  986 F. Supp. 1384· S.D. Fla.· 1997-05-21 ·cited 1×
  The court held that an insured's failure to disclose a prior material loss on an insurance application voids the policy from its inception, even if the omission was unintentional, because the insured signed the application affirming its truthfulness.
• Allstate Ins. v. Myers
  951 F. Supp. 1014· M.D. Fla.· 1996-07-19 ·cited 1×
  Allstate Insurance sought a declaratory judgment that it had no duty to defend or indemnify the estate of Ahem D. Welsh in connection with a counterclaim alleging Welsh knowingly transmitted HIV to McGinnis through unprotected sexual intercourse. The court held that the policy's
• Singer v. Smith Barney Shearson
  926 F. Supp. 183· S.D. Fla.· 1996-04-22 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the parties' arbitration agreements clearly expressed an intent to submit all disputes, including eligibility, to arbitration, and thus the NASD had jurisdiction over the eligibility dispute.
• Bashir v. Nat'l RR Passenger Corp.(Amtrak)
  929 F. Supp. 404· S.D. Fla.· 1996-03-25 ·cited 1×
  Federal law, specifically the Federal Railroad Safety Act, preempts state law claims for inadequate warning devices and excessive speed at railroad crossings where federal funds participated in installation or federal regulations govern speed limits. Claims for negligent failure