Automobile Sales, Inc. v. Federated Mutual Implement and Hardware Insurance Company

256 So. 2d 386
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedJanuary 11, 1972
Docket71-741
StatusPublished
Cited by20 cases

This text of 256 So. 2d 386 (Automobile Sales, Inc. v. Federated Mutual Implement and Hardware Insurance Company) 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
Automobile Sales, Inc. v. Federated Mutual Implement and Hardware Insurance Company, 256 So. 2d 386 (Fla. Ct. App. 1972).

Opinion

256 So.2d 386 (1972)

AUTOMOBILE SALES, INC., a Florida Corporation, D/B/a Toyota Automobile Sales, Appellant,
v.
FEDERATED MUTUAL IMPLEMENT AND HARDWARE INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellee.

No. 71-741.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

January 11, 1972.

Melvin D. Schiller, Coral Gables, for appellant.

Wicker, Smith, Pyszka, Blomqvist & Davant, and Dan Draper, Jr., Miami, for appellee.

Before SWANN, C.J., and CHARLES CARROLL, J., and LESTER M. IGNATIUS, Associate Judge.

LESTER M. IGNATIUS, Associate Judge.

Appellant, an automobile dealer, seeks review of an adverse summary final judgment in an action whereby the appellant sought to recover damages under a contract of insurance, based upon an alleged fraud perpetrated by a third party in the purchase of an automobile. The appellee contended the act complained of did not constitute a fraudulent transaction so as to afford coverage.

Ordinarily, the issue of fraud is not a proper subject of a summary judgment. Fraud is a subtle thing, requiring a full explanation of the facts and circumstances of the alleged wrong to determine if they collectively constitute a fraud. Alepgo Corporation v. Pozin, Fla.App. 1959, 114 So.2d 645; Bryant v. Small, Fla.App. 1970, 236 So.2d 150. While there may be some unusual circumstances permitting entry of a summary judgment, the record in the case sub judice does not present that unique situation which would permit entry of a summary judgment. Therefore, we reverse.

Reversed and remanded for further proceedings consistent herewith.

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

Related

RICHARD CLEVELAND v. WESTPORT RECOVERY CORPORATION
District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2021
Gorrin Jr. v. Poker Run Acquisitions, Inc.
237 So. 3d 1149 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2018)
Laboratory Corp. v. PROFESSIONAL RECOVERY
813 So. 2d 266 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2002)
Graef v. Hegedus
698 So. 2d 655 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1997)
Rosen v. Zoberg
680 So. 2d 1050 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1996)
Baker v. United Services Auto. Ass'n
661 So. 2d 128 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1995)
Advest, Inc. v. Rader
743 F. Supp. 851 (S.D. Florida, 1990)
Peninsula Yacht Cay Dev., Inc. v. SOUTHERN FLORIDABANC SAVINGS ASS'N
552 So. 2d 1139 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1989)
Department of Revenue v. Rudd
545 So. 2d 369 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1989)
PUBLIC HEALTH TRUST OF DADE CTY. v. Prudential Ins. Co.
415 So. 2d 896 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1982)
Amazon v. Davidson
390 So. 2d 383 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1980)
Stephens v. Kies Oil Co., Inc.
386 So. 2d 1289 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1980)
Glantz v. Cohan
364 So. 2d 54 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1978)
Fox v. Boyer
307 So. 2d 239 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1975)
Parnell v. Hartford National Bank & Trust Co. of Hartford
307 So. 2d 253 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1975)
Ryskind v. Robinson
302 So. 2d 427 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1974)
Hermes v. Anton
300 So. 2d 46 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1974)
Kelly v. Buckeye Holding Co.
297 So. 2d 869 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1974)
Tullo v. Horner
296 So. 2d 502 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1974)
Krantz v. Donner
285 So. 2d 699 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1973)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
256 So. 2d 386, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/automobile-sales-inc-v-federated-mutual-implement-and-hardware-insurance-fladistctapp-1972.