American Roll-Up Door Co. v. Chromalloy Gas Turbine Corp.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

American Roll-Up Door Co. v. Chromalloy Gas Turbine Corp.

662 So. 2d 767, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 11962, 1995 WL 676075

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided November 15, 1995·No. No. 94-2300·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant filed in the circuit court a complaint to foreclose a mechanic’s lien on a claim for $4,592.00. The court entered summary judgment for the defendants on the holding that the circuit court was without subject matter jurisdiction. The judgment is reversed on the authority of Alexdex Corp. v. Nachon Enterprises, Inc., 641 So.2d 858 (Fla.1994), decided subsequent to the judgment entered in this case. Appellees, while conceding that the cited case is dispositive on the issue of the court’s subject matter jurisdiction, argue that the court correctly entered summary final judgment for defendants because of the other grounds upon which their motion was based. The court denied the motion on each of the other grounds on the finding that each involved factual issues, and we are not inclined, on this record, to disturb that ruling.

REVERSED AND REMANDED FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS.

STONE and KLEIN, JJ., and OWEN, WILLIAM C., JR., Senior Judge, concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

Appellant filed in the circuit court a complaint to foreclose a mechanic’s lien on a claim for $4,592.00. The court entered summary judgment for the defendants on the holding that the circuit court was without subject matter jurisdiction. The judgment is reversed on the authority of Alexdex Corp. v. Nachon Enterprises, Inc., 641 So.2d 858 (Fla.1994), decided subsequent to the judgment entered in this case. Appellees, while conceding that the cited case is dispositive on the issue of the court’s subject matter jurisdiction, argue that the court correctly entered summary final judgment for defendants because of the other grounds upon which their motion was based. The court denied the motion on each of the other grounds on the finding that each involved factual issues, and we are not inclined, on this record, to disturb that ruling.

REVERSED AND REMANDED FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS.

STONE and KLEIN, JJ., and OWEN, WILLIAM C., JR., Senior Judge, concur.

American Roll-Up Door Co. v. Chromalloy Gas Turbine Corp., 662 So. 2d 767, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 11962, 1995 WL 676075 (Fla. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

662 So. 2d 767 (American Roll-Up Door Co. v. Chromalloy Gas Turbine Corp.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related