White v. Bachner

632 So. 2d 94, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 420, 1994 WL 26909
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided February 1, 1994·No. No. 93-1436·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Charles G. White appeals from an order of the trial court granting final summary judgment in a claim on a promissory note. We affirm.

The trial court correctly granted summary judgment because there is no evidence of any release, waiver, novation, or discharge of the valid promissory note. “A promissory note admitted into evidence is sufficient, without other extrinsic proof, to establish a prima facie case in an action on the note.” Perez v. Rivero, 634 So.2d 914, 916 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988); see also Hay cook v. Ostman, 397 So.2d 743 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981). There is no written release. See Deese v. Mobley, 392 So.2d 364 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981); § 673.605, Fla.Stat. (1991). Neither is there evidence of a novation. Finally, the defense of laches was specifically waived by the terms of the instrument, and the suit was filed within the statute of limitations period.

Affirmed.

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

White v. Bachner, 632 So. 2d 94, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 420, 1994 WL 26909 (Fla. Ct. App. 1994).

632 So. 2d 94 (White v. Bachner) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Deese v. Mobley
392 So. 2d 364 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1981)
Haycook v. Ostman
397 So. 2d 743 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1981)
State v. Abbott
634 So. 2d 911 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1994)