Mayzell v. Quarles & Brady

744 So. 2d 1073, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 12502, 1999 WL 743706
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided September 22, 1999·No. No. 98-3672·Published

Opinion

GLICKSTEIN, Senior Judge.

This is an appeal from a final judgment in favor of appellee. We affirm.

The parties agree that the trial court erred in striking as untimely the affidavits filed in opposition to the motion for summary judgment. How the error occurred is unexplained in light of the plain language of Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.510(c) which permits delivery of such opposing affidavits prior to 5:00 p.m. two business days prior to hearing on the motion.

Unlike Goldstein v. Wortmann, 712 So.2d 397 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998), however, appellee in this case has presented the argument that notwithstanding the trial court’s erroneously striking the affidavits, the error was harmless. We agree.

POLEN and SHAHOOD, JJ., concur.

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

Mayzell v. Quarles & Brady, 744 So. 2d 1073, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 12502, 1999 WL 743706 (Fla. Ct. App. 1999).

744 So. 2d 1073 (Mayzell v. Quarles & Brady) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Goldstein v. Wortmann
712 So. 2d 397 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1998)