Bello v. Holyoke Mutual Fire Insurance Co. of Salem

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Bello v. Holyoke Mutual Fire Insurance Co. of Salem

382 So. 2d 1272, 1980 Fla. App. LEXIS 23679

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided April 15, 1980·No. No. 79-689·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

A review of the record demonstrates that the trial court correctly determined that appellee, Holyoke Mutual Fire Insurance Company, was entitled to summary judgment in its favor, as a matter of law; there were no genuine issues of material fact left unresolved. See Midwest Mutual Insurance Company v. Santiesteban, 287 So.2d 665 (Fla.1973); Sandron Corporation v. Utica Mutual Insurance Company, 360 So.2d 477 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978); U.S. Liability Insurance Company v. Bove, 347 So.2d 678 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977); Stewart v. State Farm Mutual Insurance Company, 316 So.2d 598 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975).

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

A review of the record demonstrates that the trial court correctly determined that appellee, Holyoke Mutual Fire Insurance Company, was entitled to summary judgment in its favor, as a matter of law; there were no genuine issues of material fact left unresolved. See Midwest Mutual Insurance Company v. Santiesteban, 287 So.2d 665 (Fla.1973); Sandron Corporation v. Utica Mutual Insurance Company, 360 So.2d 477 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978); U.S. Liability Insurance Company v. Bove, 347 So.2d 678 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977); Stewart v. State Farm Mutual Insurance Company, 316 So.2d 598 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975).

Affirmed.

Bello v. Holyoke Mutual Fire Insurance Co. of Salem, 382 So. 2d 1272, 1980 Fla. App. LEXIS 23679 (Fla. Ct. App. 1980).

Pincite

382 So. 2d 1272 (Bello v. Holyoke Mutual Fire Insurance Co. of Salem) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related