Siegel v. Raybro Electric Supplies, Inc.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Siegel v. Raybro Electric Supplies, Inc.

189 So. 2d 497, 1966 Fla. App. LEXIS 4772

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedAugust 30, 1966

DocketNo. 65-752

StatusPublished

This text of 189 So. 2d 497 (Siegel v. Raybro Electric Supplies, 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

Siegel v. Raybro Electric Supplies, Inc., 189 So. 2d 497, 1966 Fla. App. LEXIS 4772 (Fla. Ct. App. 1966).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellants, general contractors, appeal from a summary judgment entered against them in favor of a supplier of electrical equipment to a subcontractor who defaulted. The basis on which the supplier, the appellee Raybro Electric Supplies, Inc. sought recovery from the appellant contractors is shown in the appellee’s brief to have been (1) that defendants-appellants “had assured Raybro that Kenny (the subcontractor) would pay for the supplies in question, and that Raybro had supplied the goods in reliance upon these assurances”; and (2) that the defendant contractors agreed to make payments to the subcontractor Kenny by checks made jointly payable to him and Raybro, and had breached that agreement. On the pleadings and the evidence submitted by the parties for and against the plaintiff’s motion for a summary judgment there was a denial and issue raised as to the first contention. The court incorrectly charged appellants with admissions by disregarding their answer to certain requests for admissions because such answers, although made by and on behalf of all, were sworn to by only one of them. See 2 Moore’s Federal Practice, § 1105. In response to the second contention, the contractors admitted the agreement to make payments by check payable to both Kenny and Rajbro, and asserted they did so except in certain instances when Raybro authorized otherwise. Also, there was some unresolved question [498]*498presented as to the correctness of the amount unpaid by Kenny. Accordingly, we hold there were genuine triable issues, and the summary judgment is reversed.

Reversed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellants, general contractors, appeal from a summary judgment entered against them in favor of a supplier of electrical equipment to a subcontractor who defaulted. The basis on which the supplier, the appellee Raybro Electric Supplies, Inc. sought recovery from the appellant contractors is shown in the appellee’s brief to have been (1) that defendants-appellants “had assured Raybro that Kenny (the subcontractor) would pay for the supplies in question, and that Raybro had supplied the goods in reliance upon these assurances”; and (2) that the defendant contractors agreed to make payments to the subcontractor Kenny by checks made jointly payable to him and Raybro, and had breached that agreement. On the pleadings and the evidence submitted by the parties for and against the plaintiff’s motion for a summary judgment there was a denial and issue raised as to the first contention. The court incorrectly charged appellants with admissions by disregarding their answer to certain requests for admissions because such answers, although made by and on behalf of all, were sworn to by only one of them. See 2 Moore’s Federal Practice, § 1105. In response to the second contention, the contractors admitted the agreement to make payments by check payable to both Kenny and Rajbro, and asserted they did so except in certain instances when Raybro authorized otherwise. Also, there was some unresolved question [498]*498presented as to the correctness of the amount unpaid by Kenny. Accordingly, we hold there were genuine triable issues, and the summary judgment is reversed.

Reversed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

189 So. 2d 497, 1966 Fla. App. LEXIS 4772, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/siegel-v-raybro-electric-supplies-inc-fladistctapp-1966.