Romans v. Haymes

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Romans v. Haymes

676 So. 2d 504, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 6913, 1996 WL 366327

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJuly 3, 1996

DocketNo. 95-2083

StatusPublished

This text of 676 So. 2d 504 (Romans v. Haymes) 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

Romans v. Haymes, 676 So. 2d 504, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 6913, 1996 WL 366327 (Fla. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

In the underlying suit for legal malpractice, we find that the trial court erred by granting the defendants’ motion for summary [505]*505judgment and by denying the plaintiffs’ motion for rehearing where the defendants, as the movants on the motion for summary judgment, failed to meet their burden of showing the absence of any genuine issue of material fact. Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.510(c); Morgan v. Growers Mktg. Serv., Inc., 370 So.2d 74 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979). A review of the record shows that a genuine issue of material fact remained as to whether Dr. Pullias, one of the physicians that fell below the standard of care, was employed by HIP Network of Florida, Inc. thereby creating the possibility of liability under the doctrine of respondeat superior.

Accordingly, we reverse and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

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

PER CURIAM.

In the underlying suit for legal malpractice, we find that the trial court erred by granting the defendants’ motion for summary [505]*505judgment and by denying the plaintiffs’ motion for rehearing where the defendants, as the movants on the motion for summary judgment, failed to meet their burden of showing the absence of any genuine issue of material fact. Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.510(c); Morgan v. Growers Mktg. Serv., Inc., 370 So.2d 74 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979). A review of the record shows that a genuine issue of material fact remained as to whether Dr. Pullias, one of the physicians that fell below the standard of care, was employed by HIP Network of Florida, Inc. thereby creating the possibility of liability under the doctrine of respondeat superior.

Accordingly, we reverse and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

676 So. 2d 504, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 6913, 1996 WL 366327, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/romans-v-haymes-fladistctapp-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack