Giardina v. Bowe

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Giardina v. Bowe

680 So. 2d 1071, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 10301, 1996 WL 557620

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedOctober 2, 1996

DocketNo. 96-152

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 680 So. 2d 1071 (Giardina v. Bowe) 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

Giardina v. Bowe, 680 So. 2d 1071, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 10301, 1996 WL 557620 (Fla. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Sylvia Giardina appeals a final summary judgment entered in favor of defendant Leslie Bowe. We reverse. In the amended complaint, Giardina asserted claims for breach of contract and breach of fiduciary duty arising out of an oral joint venture agreement. Her claims arise from her participation in a Lotto pool with Bowe. A review of the record, which includes affidavits and depositions of the parties and other pool members, reveals that genuine issues of material fact remain unresolved as to whether the parties had an agreement to purchase tickets as alleged in the amended complaint, whether the parties engaged in a joint venture, and whether they had established a fiduciary relationship. See Florida Rock & Sand Co. v. Cox, 344 So.2d 1296 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977); Navarro v. Espino, 316 So.2d 646 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975); Browning v. Peyton, 918 F.2d 1516 (11th Cir.l990)(applying Florida law). “If the evidence raises any issue of material fact, if it is conflicting, if it will permit different reasonable inferences, or if it tends to prove the issues, it should be submitted to the jury as a question of fact to be determined by it.” Moore v. Morris, 475 So.2d 666, 668 (Fla. [1072]*10721985). Accordingly, the summary judgment is reversed.

Reversed and remanded.

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

PER CURIAM.

Sylvia Giardina appeals a final summary judgment entered in favor of defendant Leslie Bowe. We reverse. In the amended complaint, Giardina asserted claims for breach of contract and breach of fiduciary duty arising out of an oral joint venture agreement. Her claims arise from her participation in a Lotto pool with Bowe. A review of the record, which includes affidavits and depositions of the parties and other pool members, reveals that genuine issues of material fact remain unresolved as to whether the parties had an agreement to purchase tickets as alleged in the amended complaint, whether the parties engaged in a joint venture, and whether they had established a fiduciary relationship. See Florida Rock & Sand Co. v. Cox, 344 So.2d 1296 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977); Navarro v. Espino, 316 So.2d 646 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975); Browning v. Peyton, 918 F.2d 1516 (11th Cir.l990)(applying Florida law). “If the evidence raises any issue of material fact, if it is conflicting, if it will permit different reasonable inferences, or if it tends to prove the issues, it should be submitted to the jury as a question of fact to be determined by it.” Moore v. Morris, 475 So.2d 666, 668 (Fla. [1072]*10721985). Accordingly, the summary judgment is reversed.

Reversed and remanded.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

680 So. 2d 1071, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 10301, 1996 WL 557620, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/giardina-v-bowe-fladistctapp-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack