Wolentarski v. Anchor Property & Casualty Ins. Co.

• Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida
• Decided: May 30, 2018
• Docket: 17-2405
• Status: Published

Opinion

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida

Opinion filed May 30, 2018. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D17-2405 Lower Tribunal No. 16-14993 ________________

Daniel Wolentarski and Maria Wolentarski, Appellants,

vs.

Anchor Property & Casualty Insurance Company, Appellee.

An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Jorge E. Cueto, Judge.

Dieppa Law Firm P.A., and Eduardo E. Dieppa III; Tabares Law P.A., and Jasiel Tabares, for appellants.

Groelle & Salmon, P.A., and Robert Groelle and Bethany C. Ruiz, for appellee.

Before ROTHENBERG, C.J., and SUAREZ and LOGUE, JJ.

ROTHENBERG, C.J. Daniel and Maria Wolentarski (“the appellants”) appeal the final judgment

entered in favor of Anchor Property & Casualty Insurance Company (“Anchor”)

issued after the trial court entered summary judgment in favor of Anchor. Because

the appellants failed to timely submit any evidence or filings in opposition to

Anchor’s motion for summary judgment, there was no record evidence of a

material issue of disputed fact. The trial court, therefore, correctly granted

Anchor’s motion for summary judgment. See Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.510(c) (providing

that evidence in opposition to summary judgment must be served at least five days

prior to the day of the hearing or delivered no later than 5:00 p.m. two business

days prior to the date of the hearing); Deshazior v. Sch. Bd. of Miami-Dade Cty,

Fla., 217 So. 3d 151, 152 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017) (holding that the trial court’s

decision not to consider an untimely affidavit in opposition to a motion for

summary judgment was not an abuse of discretion).

Affirmed.