Case ID: so2d_605/html/1026-02.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

George L. GARRIDO, individually, and the Garrido Group Advertising, Inc., Appellants, v. BURGER KING CORPORATION, a Florida corporation, and Thomas Kupciunas, individually, Appellees.
    No. 92-595.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
    Oct. 20, 1992.
    Bailey Hunt Jones & Busto and Mercedes C. Busto, Miami, and Scott L. Cagan, New York City, for appellants.
    Angones, Hunter, McClure, Lynch & Williams and Francisco R. Angones, Miami, Breed, Abbot & Morgan and Stephen R. Lang and Brian L. Sullivan, New York City, for appellees.
    Before JORGENSON, LEVY and GODERICH, JJ.
   PER CURIAM.

The record reflects the existence of a material question of fact relating to the “novelty” issue, and accordingly, the trial court was in error in granting the appel-lee’s motion for summary judgment. See Florida East Coast Railway Co. v. Metropolitan Dade County, 438 So.2d 978 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983). As a result thereof, the summary judgment entered by the trial court must be reversed, with this cause thereafter proceeding to trial.

Reversed and remanded.