Kessler v. First State Bank of Miami

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Kessler v. First State Bank of Miami

247 So. 2d 796, 1971 Fla. App. LEXIS 6759

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided May 18, 1971·No. No. 70-1079·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The appellant was the defendant in an action by a bank claiming as a subsequent holder for value upon a check given by appellant. The trial court entered a summary final judgment for the plaintiff upon the pleadings, depositions and affidavits on file. Upon appeal, appellant claims a genuine issue of material fact as to a possible notice to the bank of a conditional delivery of the check. The affidavits in support of appellee’s motion deny any notice of infirmity and appellant’s affidavit sets forth no fact which would raise an inference of such notice. Summary judgment was properly entered. See Sorrells Bros. Packing Co. v. Union State Bank, Fla.App.1962, 144 So.2d 74.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

The appellant was the defendant in an action by a bank claiming as a subsequent holder for value upon a check given by appellant. The trial court entered a summary final judgment for the plaintiff upon the pleadings, depositions and affidavits on file. Upon appeal, appellant claims a genuine issue of material fact as to a possible notice to the bank of a conditional delivery of the check. The affidavits in support of appellee’s motion deny any notice of infirmity and appellant’s affidavit sets forth no fact which would raise an inference of such notice. Summary judgment was properly entered. See Sorrells Bros. Packing Co. v. Union State Bank, Fla.App.1962, 144 So.2d 74.

Affirmed.

Kessler v. First State Bank of Miami, 247 So. 2d 796, 1971 Fla. App. LEXIS 6759 (Fla. Ct. App. 1971).

Pincite

247 So. 2d 796 (Kessler v. First State Bank of Miami) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related