Manso v. Heil-Quaker Corp.

561 So. 2d 28, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 3443, 1990 WL 64136
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedMay 16, 1990
DocketNo. 88-3425
StatusPublished

This text of 561 So. 2d 28 (Manso v. Heil-Quaker Corp.) 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
Manso v. Heil-Quaker Corp., 561 So. 2d 28, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 3443, 1990 WL 64136 (Fla. Ct. App. 1990).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We reverse the summary judgment entered in favor of Defendant, Heil-Quaker Corporation, and against Plaintiff, Orlando Manso, because there is a genuine issue of material fact which precludes summary judgment, as a matter of law. The issue is whether the air conditioning unit, manufactured by Heil-Quaker Corporation, was defective causing Manso’s damages. See Cassisi v. Maytag Company, 396 So.2d 1140 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981).

[29]*29REVERSED 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

Related

Cassisi v. Maytag Co.
396 So. 2d 1140 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1981)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
561 So. 2d 28, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 3443, 1990 WL 64136, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/manso-v-heil-quaker-corp-fladistctapp-1990.