Palazzolo v. Fessler

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Palazzolo v. Fessler

680 So. 2d 607, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 10289, 1996 WL 556587

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedOctober 2, 1996

DocketNo. 95-03266

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 680 So. 2d 607 (Palazzolo v. Fessler) 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

Palazzolo v. Fessler, 680 So. 2d 607, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 10289, 1996 WL 556587 (Fla. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

BLUE, Judge.

Ross Palazzolo, d/b/a Safety Harbor Chiropractic Clinic (tenant), appeals the partial summary judgment entered in favor of the Fesslers (landlords) in an eviction action. We have jurisdiction to review the portion of the order that granted the summary judgment as to count one of the complaint pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.130(a)(3)(C)(ii). As to that ruling, we reverse because there are disputed issues of material fact regarding the tenant’s rent obligation.

The order on appeal also ruled on the landlords’ motion for summary judgment on the tenant’s second counterclaim. Although this opinion may affect that nonfinal order, this court does not have jurisdiction to review that portion of the order on appeal.

It is not necessary to present a complete recitation of the facts involved in this commercial lease dispute. In order to determine the tenant’s rent obligations, it was necessary to examine the lease docu-merits. These documents are unclear regarding when the rental period actually began and when specified rent increases were due. Ambiguities in a contract create genuine issues of material fact as to the correct interpretation of the contract, and so preclude summary judgment. See Griffin Builders Supply, Inc. v. Jones, 384 So.2d 265, 266 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980). “When the wording of an agreement is ambiguous and parties suggest different interpretations, the issue of proper interpretation becomes one of fact precluding grant of summary judgment.” 384 So.2d at 266.

The lease documents were ambiguous and thus created genuine issues of material fact. Accordingly, the summary judgment as to count one is reversed and the case remanded for further proceedings.

Reversed and remanded.

SCHOONOVER, A.C.J., and ALTENBERND, J., concur.

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

BLUE, Judge.

Ross Palazzolo, d/b/a Safety Harbor Chiropractic Clinic (tenant), appeals the partial summary judgment entered in favor of the Fesslers (landlords) in an eviction action. We have jurisdiction to review the portion of the order that granted the summary judgment as to count one of the complaint pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.130(a)(3)(C)(ii). As to that ruling, we reverse because there are disputed issues of material fact regarding the tenant’s rent obligation.

The order on appeal also ruled on the landlords’ motion for summary judgment on the tenant’s second counterclaim. Although this opinion may affect that nonfinal order, this court does not have jurisdiction to review that portion of the order on appeal.

It is not necessary to present a complete recitation of the facts involved in this commercial lease dispute. In order to determine the tenant’s rent obligations, it was necessary to examine the lease docu-merits. These documents are unclear regarding when the rental period actually began and when specified rent increases were due. Ambiguities in a contract create genuine issues of material fact as to the correct interpretation of the contract, and so preclude summary judgment. See Griffin Builders Supply, Inc. v. Jones, 384 So.2d 265, 266 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980). “When the wording of an agreement is ambiguous and parties suggest different interpretations, the issue of proper interpretation becomes one of fact precluding grant of summary judgment.” 384 So.2d at 266.

The lease documents were ambiguous and thus created genuine issues of material fact. Accordingly, the summary judgment as to count one is reversed and the case remanded for further proceedings.

Reversed and remanded.

SCHOONOVER, A.C.J., and ALTENBERND, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

680 So. 2d 607, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 10289, 1996 WL 556587, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/palazzolo-v-fessler-fladistctapp-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack