Gordon v. Fortune Savings Bank

561 So. 2d 30, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 3306, 1990 WL 64150
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided May 16, 1990·No. No. 89-2775·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We reverse the summary final judgment entered in favor of Plaintiff, Fortune Savings Bank, and against Defendant, Joel P. Gordon, because there exists a genuine issue of material fact which precludes entry of summary judgment as a matter of law. That issue is whether or not Fortune Savings Bank was a holder in due course as concerns the promissory note in question that was assigned to it. Seinfeld v. Commercial Bank & Trust, 405 So.2d 1039 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981).

REVERSED and REMANDED for further proceedings consistent herewith.

WALDEN, GUNTHER and GARRETT, JJ., concur.

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

Gordon v. Fortune Savings Bank, 561 So. 2d 30, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 3306, 1990 WL 64150 (Fla. Ct. App. 1990).

561 So. 2d 30 (Gordon v. Fortune Savings Bank) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Keane v. Andrews
561 So. 2d 30 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1990)