Paez v. Susquehanna Broad. Corp., 473 So. 2d 298 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985). · Go Syfert
Search
Paez v. Susquehanna Broad. Corp., 473 So. 2d 298 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
No syfertize treatment data for cluster 7612346.
Josefina PAEZ
v.
SUSQUEHANNA BROADCASTING CORPORATION
No. 84-2657.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
Aug 6, 1985.
473 So. 2d 298
Taylor, Brion, Buker & Greene and Ar-naldo Velez, Miami, for appellant., Paul & Burt and Dan Paul, Miami, for appellee.
Baskin, Ferguson, Hendry.
Published
PER CURIAM.

We affirm the summary judgment entered by the trial court upon a holding that no genuine issue exists as to any material fact. Whitten v. Progressive Casualty Insurance Co., 410 So.2d 501 (Fla.1982); Johnson v. Gulf Life Insurance Co., 429 So.2d 744 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); Proprietors Insurance Co. v. Siegel, 410 So.2d 993 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982). Appellant’s failure to comply with contest terms set forth by appellee precludes recovery. See Endres v. Buffalo Automobile Dealers Assoc., 29 Misc.2d 756, 217 N.Y.S.2d 460 (Sup.Ct.1961); Bowlerama of Texas, Inc. v. Miyakawa, 449 S.W.2d 357 (Tex.Civ.App.1969); see also Webster Lumber Co. v. Lincoln, 94 Fla. 1097, 115 So. 498 (1927); Strong & Trowbridge Co. v. H. Baars & Co., 60 Fla. 630, 54 So. 92 (1910); Sullivan v. Economic [*299] Research Properties, 455 So.2d 630 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984); Restatement (Second) of Contracts, §§ 58, 60 (1979).

Affirmed.