M.J. Kelley Co. v. Spring Lock Scaffolding, Inc.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

M.J. Kelley Co. v. Spring Lock Scaffolding, Inc.

467 So. 2d 831, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 1076, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 13681

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedApril 26, 1985

DocketNo. 84-1669

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 467 So. 2d 831 (M.J. Kelley Co. v. Spring Lock Scaffolding, Inc.) 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

M.J. Kelley Co. v. Spring Lock Scaffolding, Inc., 467 So. 2d 831, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 1076, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 13681 (Fla. Ct. App. 1985).

Pincite

Opinion

DANAHY, Acting Chief Judge.

The appellant seeks review of a summary judgment against it in the amount of [832]*832$6,887.10 representing rental charges for scaffolding leased to the appellant by the appellee plus charges for the alleged loss of the scaffolding and tax. Upon consideration of the briefs and the record on appeal, we conclude that there are genuine issues of material fact as to the recoverable rental charges, the appellant’s responsibility under the lease for the return of the scaffolding, and the amount claimed by the appellee for the loss of the scaffolding. Therefore, we reverse the final summary judgment and remand this cause for further proceedings. Holl v. Talcott, 191 So.2d 40 (Fla.1966); St. Clair v. Smith, 445 So.2d 1113 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984).

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

CAMPBELL and HALL, JJ., concur.

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

DANAHY, Acting Chief Judge.

The appellant seeks review of a summary judgment against it in the amount of [832]*832$6,887.10 representing rental charges for scaffolding leased to the appellant by the appellee plus charges for the alleged loss of the scaffolding and tax. Upon consideration of the briefs and the record on appeal, we conclude that there are genuine issues of material fact as to the recoverable rental charges, the appellant’s responsibility under the lease for the return of the scaffolding, and the amount claimed by the appellee for the loss of the scaffolding. Therefore, we reverse the final summary judgment and remand this cause for further proceedings. Holl v. Talcott, 191 So.2d 40 (Fla.1966); St. Clair v. Smith, 445 So.2d 1113 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984).

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

CAMPBELL and HALL, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

467 So. 2d 831, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 1076, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 13681, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mj-kelley-co-v-spring-lock-scaffolding-inc-fladistctapp-1985.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack