Danford v. Ludovici

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Danford v. Ludovici

789 So. 2d 1068, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 8055, 2001 WL 649473

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided June 13, 2001·No. Nos. 3D00-2341, 3D00-3021·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Mary Jane Danford (“Danford”) appeals from an adverse order granting summary judgment in favor of appellee, her landlord, and awarding the landlord attorney’s fees and costs. Because the trial court improperly deprived Danford of her right to litigate her claims on the merits as mandated by Article I, Section 21 of the Florida Constitution, we reverse and remand for a trial on all issues except possession. See Freedman v. Geiger, 314 So.2d 189 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975). Additionally, the award of attorney’s fees and costs is also reversed. See Key v. Angrand, 638 So.2d 628 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994).

Reversed and remanded.

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

PER CURIAM.

Mary Jane Danford (“Danford”) appeals from an adverse order granting summary judgment in favor of appellee, her landlord, and awarding the landlord attorney’s fees and costs. Because the trial court improperly deprived Danford of her right to litigate her claims on the merits as mandated by Article I, Section 21 of the Florida Constitution, we reverse and remand for a trial on all issues except possession. See Freedman v. Geiger, 314 So.2d 189 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975). Additionally, the award of attorney’s fees and costs is also reversed. See Key v. Angrand, 638 So.2d 628 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994).

Reversed and remanded.

Danford v. Ludovici, 789 So. 2d 1068, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 8055, 2001 WL 649473 (Fla. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

789 So. 2d 1068 (Danford v. Ludovici) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related