Case Name: BARNETT BANK OF SOUTH FLORIDA, Appellant, v. ALL TECH, INC., and NCNB Bank of Florida, Appellees
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1991-11-12
Citations: 588 So. 2d 680
Docket Number: No. 91-440
Parties: BARNETT BANK OF SOUTH FLORIDA, Appellant, v. ALL TECH, INC., and NCNB Bank of Florida, Appellees.
Judges: Before JORGENSON, LEVY and GODERICH, JJ.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 588
Pages: 680–680

Head Matter:
BARNETT BANK OF SOUTH FLORIDA, Appellant, v. ALL TECH, INC., and NCNB Bank of Florida, Appellees.
No. 91-440.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
Nov. 12, 1991.
Rosenberg & Rothman and Sheldon Rosenberg, Miami, for appellant.
Bradshaw Lotspeich, Freshman, Freshman & Traitz and Stacey Soloff, Miami, for appellees.
Before JORGENSON, LEVY and GODERICH, JJ.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
The appellant appeals the trial court's entry of a Final Summary Judgment in favor of the appellees. The appellant contends that the said summary judgment was entered by the trial court in a manner that is violative of Rule 1.510 of the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure. Specifically, during a hearing on other motions, the appel-lees made ore tenus motions for summary judgment against the appellant. Despite the fact that the appellees made these motions orally at the hearing, obviously without the required twenty day advance notice to the appellants, the trial court granted the motions and entered Final Summary Judgments in favor of the appellees. Clearly, the very specific requirements of Rule 1.510(a) of the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure were ignored by both the appel-lees and the trial court. Appellant argues that the foregoing resulted in reversible error. We agree.
Accordingly, the Final Summary Judgment entered in favor of the appellees must be reversed. This cause is remanded to the trial court for further proceedings consistent herewith.
Reversed and remanded.