Case Name: Peter SOLIMINE and Armand Construction Company, Appellants, v. NUMERICA SAVINGS BANK and Numerica Financial Services, Inc., etc., et al., Appellees
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1991-09-18
Citations: 587 So. 2d 505
Docket Number: No. 90-2808
Parties: Peter SOLIMINE and Armand Construction Company, Appellants, v. NUMERICA SAVINGS BANK and Numerica Financial Services, Inc., etc., et al., Appellees.
Judges: DELL and GARRETT, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 587
Pages: 505–505

Head Matter:
Peter SOLIMINE and Armand Construction Company, Appellants, v. NUMERICA SAVINGS BANK and Numerica Financial Services, Inc., etc., et al., Appellees.
No. 90-2808.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
Sept. 18, 1991.
Rehearing Denied Nov. 12, 1991.
Joseph L. Mannikko, Frasier & Mannik-ko, Stuart, for appellants.
Charles M. Auslander, Fine Jacobson Schwartz Nash Block & England, Miami, for appellee Numérica Sav. Bank.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Appellants seek review of the summary judgment entered against them. Their affirmative defense alleged appellees knew of the secondary financing and therefore, could not have relied on appellants' sworn statement to the contrary. Appellees failed to negate that affirmative defense. See Steiner v. Ciba-Geigy Corp., 364 So.2d 47, 52 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978), cert. denied, 373 So.2d 461 (1979). Hence, a genuine issue of material fact remained as to whether appellees relied on those representations, which precluded entry of the summary judgment.
REVERSED AND REMANDED FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS CONSISTENT WITH THIS OPINION.
DELL and GARRETT, JJ., concur.
FARMER, J., dissents without opinion.