Anderson v. Redden

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Anderson v. Redden

505 So. 2d 22, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 951, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 7578

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedApril 7, 1987

DocketNo. 86-1686

StatusPublished

This text of 505 So. 2d 22 (Anderson v. Redden) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Anderson v. Redden, 505 So. 2d 22, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 951, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 7578 (Fla. Ct. App. 1987).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

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

PER CURIAM.

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).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

505 So. 2d 22, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 951, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 7578, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/anderson-v-redden-fladistctapp-1987.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack