Underwriters at Interest at Lloyd's v. Watkins Motor Lines, Inc.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Underwriters at Interest at Lloyd's v. Watkins Motor Lines, Inc.

846 So. 2d 584, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 6147, 2003 WL 1969217

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedApril 30, 2003

DocketNo. 3D02-1949

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 846 So. 2d 584 (Underwriters at Interest at Lloyd's v. Watkins Motor Lines, 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

Underwriters at Interest at Lloyd's v. Watkins Motor Lines, Inc., 846 So. 2d 584, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 6147, 2003 WL 1969217 (Fla. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Underwriters at Interest at Lloyds appeals a judgment entered following summary judgment. We reverse. The trial court erred in entering summary judgment as genuine issues of fact remain unresolved as to the proper construction of the pertinent contract provisions. Each side suggests that we construe the contract in accordance with its position. However, summary judgment is inappropriate where the contract at issue is susceptible of more than one reasonable construction. Birwelco-Montenay, Inc. v. Infilco Degremont, Inc., 827 So.2d 255 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001). Accordingly, the language of the agreement is ambiguous and presents factual issues requiring reversal.

Reversed and remanded.

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

PER CURIAM.

Underwriters at Interest at Lloyds appeals a judgment entered following summary judgment. We reverse. The trial court erred in entering summary judgment as genuine issues of fact remain unresolved as to the proper construction of the pertinent contract provisions. Each side suggests that we construe the contract in accordance with its position. However, summary judgment is inappropriate where the contract at issue is susceptible of more than one reasonable construction. Birwelco-Montenay, Inc. v. Infilco Degremont, Inc., 827 So.2d 255 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001). Accordingly, the language of the agreement is ambiguous and presents factual issues requiring reversal.

Reversed and remanded.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

846 So. 2d 584, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 6147, 2003 WL 1969217, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/underwriters-at-interest-at-lloyds-v-watkins-motor-lines-inc-fladistctapp-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack