Berman v. Gables Lincoln-Mercury, Inc.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Berman v. Gables Lincoln-Mercury, Inc.

108 So. 2d 53

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJanuary 6, 1959

DocketNo. 58-294

StatusPublished

This text of 108 So. 2d 53 (Berman v. Gables Lincoln-Mercury, Inc.) 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

Berman v. Gables Lincoln-Mercury, Inc., 108 So. 2d 53 (Fla. Ct. App. 1959).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The plaintiff in the trial court assigns as error the entry of a summary final judgment for the defendant in an action brought to recover a deposit made pursuant to a contract to purchase an automobile. The contract was in writing and no genuine issue as to any material fact has been demonstrated by the appellant. It is urged that the trial judge erred in his construction of the contract, but a careful examination of the contract and the facts surrounding its execution does not convince us that error was committed. The construction of the contract was for the court. Pierce v. Isaac, 134 Fla. 666, 184 So. 509.

Affirmed.

CARROLL, CHAS., C. J., and HORTON and PEARSON, JJ„ concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

The plaintiff in the trial court assigns as error the entry of a summary final judgment for the defendant in an action brought to recover a deposit made pursuant to a contract to purchase an automobile. The contract was in writing and no genuine issue as to any material fact has been demonstrated by the appellant. It is urged that the trial judge erred in his construction of the contract, but a careful examination of the contract and the facts surrounding its execution does not convince us that error was committed. The construction of the contract was for the court. Pierce v. Isaac, 134 Fla. 666, 184 So. 509.

Affirmed.

CARROLL, CHAS., C. J., and HORTON and PEARSON, JJ„ concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

108 So. 2d 53, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/berman-v-gables-lincoln-mercury-inc-fladistctapp-1959.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack