Greene v. Seigle, 745 So. 2d 411 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999). · Go Syfert
Search
Greene v. Seigle, 745 So. 2d 411 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
G Cite
cited 2× by 2 distinct cases, 2009–2018 · …an order granting summary judgment on liability determines a party's right to the relief requested and to deny either party a hearing must be construed as a denial of due process. ⚠ not in text
8 citation events (7 in the last 25 years) across 2 distinct courts.
Top citers, strongest first. 4 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Chiu v. Wells Fargo Bank (2×) also: Cited "see"
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2018 · confidence medium
To the extent that summary judgment evidence has not already been filed with the court, the adverse party must serve a copy on the movant pursuant to rule 1.080 at least 5 days prior to the day of the hearing, or by delivery to the movant's attorney no later than 5:00 p.m. 2 business days prior to the day of hearing. (emphasis added). 4 745 So. 2d 411, 411 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999); Travelers Ins.
discussed Cited "see" MERLANDE RICHARD and ELIE RICHARD v. BANK OF AMERICA
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2018 · signal: accord · confidence high
Id. (“An order granting summary judgment on liability determines a party’s right to the relief requested and to deny either party a hearing must be construed as a denial of due process.”); accord Greene v. Seigle, 745 So. 2d 411 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999) (where trial court granted defendant's motion for summary judgment without a hearing or notice to plaintiff it violated Rule 1.510(c) and plaintiff's due process rights requiring reversal).
discussed Cited "see" State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. v. Lezcano
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2009 · signal: accord · confidence high
Id. (“An order granting summary judgment on liability determines a party’s right to the relief requested and to deny either party a hearing must be construed as a denial of due process.”); accord Greene v. Seigle, 745 So.2d 411 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999) (where trial court granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment without a hearing or notice to plaintiff it violated Rule 1.510(c) and plaintiffs due process rights requiring reversal).
cited Cited "see, e.g." WG Evergreen Woods SH, LLC v. Fares
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2016 · signal: see also · confidence medium
Lezcano, 22 So.3d at 634 ; see also Greene v. Seigle, 745 So.2d 411, 411 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999); Kozich, 609 So.2d at 148 .
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Andrew GREENE, Appellant/Cross-Appellee,
v.
Mark SEIGLE, Ronald Wright, Jacqueline Sue Turoff, B.J. Bond, Lisa Strachan, David Steele, and On-Target Solutions, Inc., a Florida corporation, Appellees/Cross-Appellants.
98-2490, 99-0213.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
Oct 27, 1999.
745 So. 2d 411
Per Curiam.
Cited by 5 opinions  |  Published

Seth Honowitz and Scott A. Mager of Kluger, Peretz, Kaplan & Berlin, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, and Glasser & Boreth, Plantation, for appellant/cross-appellee.

Ronald E. Solomon of the Law Offices of Ronald E. Solomon, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, for Appellee/cross-appellant-Mark Seigle.

Jana Gold Taylor and Charles T. Whitelock of Whitelock & Associates, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, for Appellee/cross-appellant-Ronald Wright.

Catherine Rafferty of Edward M. Kay, P.A., Fort Lauderdale for Appellees/cross-appellants-Jacqueline Sue Turoff, B.J. Bond, Lisa Strachan, On-Target Solutions, Inc.

Patricia A. Burton, Fort Lauderdale, for Appellee/cross-appellant-David Steele.

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff Andrew Greene appeals final summary judgments entered in favor of all defendants. Defendants Mark Seigle and Ronald Wright cross-appeal the trial court's denial of their motions to dismiss. We affirm in all respects, except to reverse the summary judgment entered in favor of Wright.

Eight days after Wright filed his motion for summary judgment, the trial court granted it without a hearing or notice to Plaintiff. This violated Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.510(c) and Plaintiff's due process rights and thus requires a reversal. See Mondestin v. Duval Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n, 500 So.2d 580 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986)(holding that a party against whom a motion for summary judgment is filed is entitled to notice and a meaningful opportunity to be heard). Accordingly, final summary judgment in favor of Wright is reversed and this case remanded for further[*412] proceedings against him. In all other respects, we affirm.

AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part, and REMANDED.

GUNTHER, KLEIN and STEVENSON, JJ., concur.