Kelly v. Patek

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Kelly v. Patek

172 So. 2d 520, 1965 Fla. App. LEXIS 4367

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 9, 1965

DocketNo. 64-668

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 172 So. 2d 520 (Kelly v. Patek) 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

Kelly v. Patek, 172 So. 2d 520, 1965 Fla. App. LEXIS 4367 (Fla. Ct. App. 1965).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is the second appearance of this cause in this court. See: Patek v. Associated Insurance Underwriters, Inc., Fla.App.1964, 160 So.2d 721.

Following the rendition of our opinion and mandate in this matter, the cause returned to the trial court whereupon the plaintiff, the appellee herein, moved for a summary judgment and for a final judgment. The matter came on for hearing before the trial judge, and the defendant failed to file any responsive affidavits or evidence to the motion.

No error has been demonstrated in the entry of the summary judgment here under review, in light of the admissions contained in the pleadings and evidence made by the appellant. See: Connelly v. Sebeco, Inc., Fla.1956, 89 So.2d 482; Pritchard v. Peppercorn and Peppercorn, Inc., Fla.1957, 96 So.2d 769; Crovella v. Cochrane, Fla.App.1958, 102 So.2d 307; Weber v. City of Hollywood, Fla.App.1960, 120 So.2d 826; Hardcastle v. Mobley, Fla.App.1962, 143 So.2d 715.

Therefore, the summary judgment here under review is hereby affirmed.

Affirmed.

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