Anderson v. Redden
505 So. 2d 22, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 951, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 7578
Opinion
The summary judgment below is reversed because the plaintiff-movant did not conclusively obviate the affirmative defense of fraud. See Nagelbush v. United Postal Savings Ass’n, 504 So.2d 782 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987); Holly Hill Acres, Ltd. v. Charter Bank, 314 So.2d 209 (Fla. 2d DCA 1975); see also Aroll v. ITT Commercial Finance Corp., 496 So.2d 1011 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986); O’Neal v. Brady, 476 So.2d 294 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985); Proprietors Ins. v. Siegel, 410 So.2d 993 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Anderson v. Redden, 505 So. 2d 22, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 951, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 7578 (Fla. Ct. App. 1987).
505 So. 2d 22 (Anderson v. Redden) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Proprietors Ins. Co. v. Siegel
410 So. 2d 993 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1982)
Aroll v. ITT Commercial Finance Corp.
496 So. 2d 1011 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1986)
O'NEAL v. Brady
476 So. 2d 294 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1985)
Holly Hill Acres Ltd. v. Charter Bk. of Gainesville
314 So. 2d 209 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1975)
Nagelbush v. United Postal Savings Ass'n
504 So. 2d 782 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1987)