Case ID: so2d_846/html/0584-01.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

UNDERWRITERS AT INTEREST AT LLOYD’S a/s/o Tech Data, Appellant, v. WATKINS MOTOR LINES, INC., Appellee.
    No. 3D02-1949.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
    April 30, 2003.
    Rehearing Denied June 4, 2003.
    Mitchell L. Shadowitz, Boca Raton, for appellant.
    Lawrence J. Roberts, Coral Gables, for appellee.
    Before LEVY, FLETCHER and SHEVIN, JJ.
   PER CURIAM.

Underwriters at Interest at Lloyds appeals a judgment entered following summary judgment. We reverse. The trial court erred in entering summary judgment as genuine issues of fact remain unresolved as to the proper construction of the pertinent contract provisions. Each side suggests that we construe the contract in accordance with its position. However, summary judgment is inappropriate where the contract at issue is susceptible of more than one reasonable construction. Birwelco-Montenay, Inc. v. Infilco Degremont, Inc., 827 So.2d 255 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001). Accordingly, the language of the agreement is ambiguous and presents factual issues requiring reversal.

Reversed and remanded.