Case ID: so2d_596/html/1299-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Joseph A. BLAINE, Appellant, v. Helen CUTLIFF, et al., Appellees.
    No. 91-362.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
    May 5, 1992.
    Caron Balkany, Coral Gables, for appellant.
    Holland & Knight, and Jon K. Stage, Miami, Bell, Boyd & Lloyd, and Paul M. Bauch, Chicago, Ill., for appellees.
    Before NESBITT, FERGUSON and LEVY, JJ.
   PER CURIAM.

The trial court was correct, as a matter of law, in granting the appellees’ Motion for Summary Judgment in connection with the defamation count filed by the appellant who was the plaintiff below. Robertson v. Industrial Insurance Company, 75 So.2d 198 (Fla.1954); Ponzoli & Wassenberg v. Zuckerman, 545 So.2d 309 (Fla. 3d DCA), review denied, 554 So.2d 1170 (Fla.1989); Wright v. Yurko, 446 So.2d 1162 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984).

However, we find that genuine issues of material fact exist with regard to the other counts filed by the appellant, thereby precluding their propriety of the entry of a summary judgment in favor of the appellees. Holl v. Talcott, 191 So.2d 40 (Fla.1966).

Accordingly, with the exception of the portion of the summary judgment rendered to the defamation count, the entry of the summary judgment is reversed with this cause being remanded for further proceedings.

Reversed and remanded.