Case Name: VAREKA INVESTMENTS, N.V., Appellant, v. NATIONAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1985-05-28
Citations: 469 So. 2d 931
Docket Number: No. 84-1867
Parties: VAREKA INVESTMENTS, N.V., Appellant, v. NATIONAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellee.
Judges: Before HENDRY, DANIEL S. PEARSON and FERGUSON, JJ.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 469
Pages: 931–931

Head Matter:
VAREKA INVESTMENTS, N.V., Appellant, v. NATIONAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellee.
No. 84-1867.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
May 28, 1985.
Steel, Hector & Davis and Denise Brody Crockett, Miami, for appellant.
C. Randolph Coleman, Miami, for appel-lee.
Before HENDRY, DANIEL S. PEARSON and FERGUSON, JJ.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
The lease provision interpreted differently by the parties contains a latent ambiguity that may be resolved only by consideration of extrinsic evidence, which evidence is itself conflicting. Summary judgment is inappropriate notwithstanding that the case is to be tried before the same judge who may have considered the extrinsic evidence in entering summary judgment. See Morton v. Morton, 307 So.2d 835, 839-40 (Fla. 3d DCA), cert. denied, 324 So.2d 90 (Fla.1975).
Reversed.