Stanford v. Silins

515 So. 2d 434, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 2651, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 11075
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedNovember 19, 1987
DocketNo. 87-7
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 515 So. 2d 434 (Stanford v. Silins) 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
Stanford v. Silins, 515 So. 2d 434, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 2651, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 11075 (Fla. Ct. App. 1987).

Opinion

UPCHURCH, Chief Judge.

This is an appeal from a final summary judgment in favor of the defendant below, Andris Silins.

The proceedings before the court on the motion were not reported. No affidavits or depositions were filed in the court below, and none appears in the récord on appeal. At oral argument, Silins’ counsel conceded that no affidavits or depositions were considered by the court at the hearing. The court apparently permitted counsel to summarize the facts and determined there was no genuine issue of material fact for trial and granted summary judgment.

Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.510, dealing with motions for summary judgment, provides:

(c) Motion and Proceedings Thereon. The motion shall state with particularity the grounds upon which it is based and the substantial matters of law to be argued and shall be served at least twenty days before the time fixed for the hearing. The adverse party may serve opposing affidavits prior to the day of hearing. The judgment sought shall be rendered forthwith if the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories and admissions on file together with the affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law. A summary judgment, interlocutory in character, may be rendered on the issue of liability alone although there is a genuine issue as to the amount of damages.

Silins’ counsel has acknowledged that the pleadings, answers to interrogatories and admissions alone do not negate the issue of liability; therefore, we must reverse.

REVERSED and REMANDED.

DAUKSCH and COWART, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Roberts v. State
515 So. 2d 434 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1987)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
515 So. 2d 434, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 2651, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 11075, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stanford-v-silins-fladistctapp-1987.