Marshall v. Smith

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Marshall v. Smith

714 So. 2d 669, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 9775, 1998 WL 439131

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedAugust 5, 1998

DocketNo. 98-0101

StatusPublished

This text of 714 So. 2d 669 (Marshall v. Smith) 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

Marshall v. Smith, 714 So. 2d 669, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 9775, 1998 WL 439131 (Fla. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

SHAHOOD, Judge.

We reverse the trial court’s grant of summary judgment in this suit for repayment on an oral loan agreement. While both parties acknowledge the existence of a $95,000 debt owed by appellant to appellee, the material terms of the agreement are disputed. We therefore remand to the trial court for further proceedings. See Hammond v. Bicknell, 379 So.2d 680 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980)(sum-mary judgment on oral loan contract was improper where both parties acknowledged the debt, but disagreed as to whether repayment was due on demand or when the debtor was financially able); see generally Moore v. Morris, 475 So.2d 666 (Fla.1985)(the party moving for summary judgment must show conclusively the absence of any genuine issues of material fact).

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

DELL and TAYLOR, JJ., concur.

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

SHAHOOD, Judge.

We reverse the trial court’s grant of summary judgment in this suit for repayment on an oral loan agreement. While both parties acknowledge the existence of a $95,000 debt owed by appellant to appellee, the material terms of the agreement are disputed. We therefore remand to the trial court for further proceedings. See Hammond v. Bicknell, 379 So.2d 680 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980)(sum-mary judgment on oral loan contract was improper where both parties acknowledged the debt, but disagreed as to whether repayment was due on demand or when the debtor was financially able); see generally Moore v. Morris, 475 So.2d 666 (Fla.1985)(the party moving for summary judgment must show conclusively the absence of any genuine issues of material fact).

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

DELL and TAYLOR, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

714 So. 2d 669, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 9775, 1998 WL 439131, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/marshall-v-smith-fladistctapp-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack