Case ID: so2d_469/html/0931-01.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

VAREKA INVESTMENTS, N.V., Appellant, v. NATIONAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellee.
    No. 84-1867.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
    May 28, 1985.
    Steel, Hector & Davis and Denise Brody Crockett, Miami, for appellant.
    C. Randolph Coleman, Miami, for appel-lee.
    Before HENDRY, DANIEL S. PEARSON and FERGUSON, JJ.
   PER CURIAM.

The lease provision interpreted differently by the parties contains a latent ambiguity that may be resolved only by consideration of extrinsic evidence, which evidence is itself conflicting. Summary judgment is inappropriate notwithstanding that the case is to be tried before the same judge who may have considered the extrinsic evidence in entering summary judgment. See Morton v. Morton, 307 So.2d 835, 839-40 (Fla. 3d DCA), cert. denied, 324 So.2d 90 (Fla.1975).

Reversed.