Case ID: so2d_371/html/1103-02.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

Wilda QUINONES, Individually and as Natural Guardian of Erick Urena Quinones, a minor, Appellant, v. SEARS, ROEBUCK & COMPANY, Appellee.
    No. 78-2093.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
    June 19, 1979.
    Horton, Perse & Ginsberg and Mallory H. Horton, Miami, for appellant.
    Helliwell, Melrose & DeWolf and Kenneth F. Claussen, Miami, for appellee.
    Before PEARSON, BARKDULL and HUBBART, JJ.
   PER CURIAM.

The summary final judgment entered in favor of the defendant Sears, Roebuck & Company in this negligence action is reversed and the cause remanded for further proceedings. On this record we cannot say that the defendant’s proof adduced in support of its motion for summary judgment was sufficient as a matter of law to negate the plaintiff’s cause of action for negligence against the defendant as set forth in the complaint. As such, a summary judgment at this stage of the proceedings was improper. Wills v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 351 So.2d 29 (Fla.1977); Holl v. Talcott, 191 So.2d 40 (Fla.1966). See Burdine’s Inc. v. McConnell, 146 Fla. 512, 1 So.2d 462 (1941).

Reversed and remanded.