Bernard v. Schnier
This text of 438 So. 2d 85 (Bernard v. Schnier) 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.
Opinion
This suit involves a suit on a note. The determinative question is whether the note was under seal. The trial court determined that it was not under seal and that the suit was barred by the applicable statute of limitations. There is little authority on the subject, but we conclude that the trial court was incorrect. The note was a sealed instrument. The summary judgment is reversed. See Megdell v. Bailey, 194 So.2d 13 (Fla. 3d DCA 1966), and McCarley v. Board of Supervisors of Tippah County, 58 Miss. 483 (Miss.1880).
The circuit court’s assessment of attorney’s fees against appellant under Section [86]*8657.105, Florida Statutes (1979), is also reversed. The matter is remanded for trial.
REVERSED AND REMANDED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
438 So. 2d 85, 1983 Fla. App. LEXIS 24301, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bernard-v-schnier-fladistctapp-1983.