Burlingham v. Allen

317 So. 2d 780
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedAugust 1, 1975
DocketNo. V-60
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 317 So. 2d 780 (Burlingham v. Allen) 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
Burlingham v. Allen, 317 So. 2d 780 (Fla. Ct. App. 1975).

Opinion

BOYER, Chief Judge.

Appellee Grusmark moved for a summary judgment, whereupon appellant sought to have the court consider, in passing upon the appellee’s motion for summary judgment, certain depositions taken in another case to which appellee was not a party. Appellee received no notice of the taking of the depositions in the other case, was not present, was not represented and had no opportunity to cross examine the deponent. In considering a motion for summary judgment the trial judge is authorized to consider only those things and matters authorized by Rule 1.510 RCP. He was eminently correct in refusing to consider the above mentioned depositions which were never even filed in the case sub judice.

Finding the other points raised by appellant to be without merit, the summary judgment here appealed is

Affirmed.

McCORD and MILLS, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Southern California Funding, Inc. v. Hutto
438 So. 2d 426 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1983)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
317 So. 2d 780, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/burlingham-v-allen-fladistctapp-1975.