From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Chereton v. Armstrong Rubber Company

Supreme Court of Florida. Division B
May 23, 1956
87 So. 2d 579 (Fla. 1956)

Opinion

May 23, 1956.

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Dade County, George E. Holt, J.

Sheldon Dubler, Miami, for appellant.

Morehead, Forrest, Gotthardt Orr, Miami, for appellee.


The defendant's answer to plaintiff's complaint raised an issue of fact that was not met by plaintiff's affidavit in support of its motion for summary judgment. So, regardless of the insufficiency of defendant's counter-affidavit, there remained a genuine issue of fact which should have been tried by a jury.

Accordingly, the summary judgment in favor of plaintiff should be and it is hereby reversed under the authority of Williams v. City of Lake City, Fla. 1953, 62 So.2d 732, Wilson v. Bachrach, Fla. 1953, 65 So.2d 546, and similar cases.

Reversed and remanded for further proceedings.

DREW, C.J., and THOMAS, ROBERTS and O'CONNELL, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Chereton v. Armstrong Rubber Company

Supreme Court of Florida. Division B
May 23, 1956
87 So. 2d 579 (Fla. 1956)
Case details for

Chereton v. Armstrong Rubber Company

Case Details

Full title:HARRY H. CHERETON, APPELLANT, v. ARMSTRONG RUBBER COMPANY, APPELLEE

Court:Supreme Court of Florida. Division B

Date published: May 23, 1956

Citations

87 So. 2d 579 (Fla. 1956)

Citing Cases

Steinberg v. Charles Sales Corp.

We hold that the claimed defense when supported by every reasonable inference is not clearly shown to be…

Pennsylvania Threshermen v. Brownlee

We therefore hold that the trial court incorrectly entered a summary final judgment, and the cause is…