Wininger v. Leopold

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Wininger v. Leopold

329 So. 2d 415, 1976 Fla. App. LEXIS 14080

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedApril 2, 1976

DocketNo. 75-702

StatusPublished

This text of 329 So. 2d 415 (Wininger v. Leopold) 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

Wininger v. Leopold, 329 So. 2d 415, 1976 Fla. App. LEXIS 14080 (Fla. Ct. App. 1976).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal of a summary final judgment entered in favor of appellees, Rudolph Leopold, Johanna Leopold, Theodore Andrews and Mary L. Andrews, and against appellant, E. Paul Wininger, in an action to determine title to a certain parcel of property.

The pleadings and affidavits reveal that there is a genuine issue of material fact precluding summary judgment; specifically, whether the deletion of appellant’s name from a warranty deed dated June 3, 1969 conveying the property occurred prior to or after the delivery of said deed. Since fact issues exist, summary judgment was prematurely entered and we, therefore, reverse and remand for further proceedings consistent with the views herein expressed. Rule 1.510(c) Fla.RCP (1975); Leaks v. Adeimy, 195 So.2d 47 (Fla.App. 1967).

Reversed and remanded for further proceedings.

CROSS and DOWNEY, JJ., and SCHULZ, GEORGE E., Associate Judge, concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal of a summary final judgment entered in favor of appellees, Rudolph Leopold, Johanna Leopold, Theodore Andrews and Mary L. Andrews, and against appellant, E. Paul Wininger, in an action to determine title to a certain parcel of property.

The pleadings and affidavits reveal that there is a genuine issue of material fact precluding summary judgment; specifically, whether the deletion of appellant’s name from a warranty deed dated June 3, 1969 conveying the property occurred prior to or after the delivery of said deed. Since fact issues exist, summary judgment was prematurely entered and we, therefore, reverse and remand for further proceedings consistent with the views herein expressed. Rule 1.510(c) Fla.RCP (1975); Leaks v. Adeimy, 195 So.2d 47 (Fla.App. 1967).

Reversed and remanded for further proceedings.

CROSS and DOWNEY, JJ., and SCHULZ, GEORGE E., Associate Judge, concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

329 So. 2d 415, 1976 Fla. App. LEXIS 14080, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wininger-v-leopold-fladistctapp-1976.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack