Case ID: so2d_671/html/0814-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

MARSHALL ROOFING, INC., Appellant, v. Stanley R. GUMBERG, Trustee, Reliance Insurance Company, Old Republic Insurance Company, and Bruce Hollander, Appellees.
    No. 95-0587.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
    March 20, 1996.
    Rehearing Denied April 26, 1996.
    Wayne W. Pomeroy of Pomeroy & Pomer-oy, P.A., and Rosemary Wilder of Law Offices of Richard A. Sherman, PA, Fort Lauderdale, for appellant.
    Bohdan Neswiacheny and Glenn J. Web-ber of Law Offices of Bohdan Neswiacheny, Fort Lauderdale, for Appellee-Old Republic Insurance Company.
    Ted R. Manry, III, and H. Vance Smith of Macfarlane, Ausley, Ferguson and McMullen, Tampa, for Appellee-Reliance Insurance Company.
   PER CURIAM.

The pleadings, depositions and affidavits in the record reveal a genuine issue of material fact as to the intention of the subject agreement; namely, whether appellant was contingently to receive monies pursuant to the agreement in addition to the monies being sought by it through its cross-claim. To this extent we reverse the final judgment and remand for non-jury trial of the issue.

We note, however, that on remand, the question of whether appellant was entitled to a reimbursement of insurance premiums is not to be considered, as this issue was not raised by the pleadings or by the parties.

GLICKSTEIN, DELL and POLEN, JJ., concur.