Carlon v. Levitz Furniture Corp.
374 So. 2d 1156
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided September 18, 1979·No. No. 78-1531·Published·Cited by 1 cases
Opinion
The trial court erred in entering summary final judgment against the appellant on the ground that his cause of action for conversion was barred by the statute of limitations. We find that there was a material issue of disputed fact regarding when the appellant’s cause of action accrued. This issue should not have been resolved through summary judgment but was exclusively for the trier of fact to determine. See Hart v. Hart, 234 So.2d 393 (Fla. 1st DCA 1970).
Reversed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Carlon v. Levitz Furniture Corp., 374 So. 2d 1156 (Fla. Ct. App. 1979).
374 So. 2d 1156 (Carlon v. Levitz Furniture Corp.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Floyd v. Homes Beautiful Const. Co.
710 So. 2d 177 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1998)