Case Name: William E. MOODY and Mildred F. Moody, his wife, Appellants, v. SEABOARD COAST LINE RAILROAD COMPANY, a corporation, and W. D. Hardin, Appellees
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1974-01-11
Citations: 287 So. 2d 707
Docket Number: No. 72-695
Parties: William E. MOODY and Mildred F. Moody, his wife, Appellants, v. SEABOARD COAST LINE RAILROAD COMPANY, a corporation, and W. D. Hardin, Appellees.
Judges: McNULTY and BOARDMAN, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 287
Pages: 707–707

Head Matter:
William E. MOODY and Mildred F. Moody, his wife, Appellants, v. SEABOARD COAST LINE RAILROAD COMPANY, a corporation, and W. D. Hardin, Appellees.
No. 72-695.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
Jan. 11, 1974.
Rehearing Denied Jan. 29, 1974.
David A. Maney, and E. B. Rood, Rood & Charlton, Tampa, for appellants.
Dabney L. Conner, Boswell, Boswell & Conner, Bartow, for appellees.

Opinion:
HOBSON, Acting Chief Judge.
Appellants timely appeal a final summary judgment.
Appellants were the parents of the deceased son who was killed in a collision between a train owned by the appellee, Seaboard, and a motor vehicle the deceased son was operating.
The trial court entered summary judgment for appellees on the ground that there was no genuine issue of material fact as to the appellants being dependent on their deceased son for support.
Florida Statute 768.02 F.S.A. (1971) specifies that "where there is neither widow nor husband, nor minor child nor children, then the action may be maintained by any person or persons dependent on such person killed for a support."
The appellants having qualified under the statute to bring this action if they can show that they were dependent on their deceased son for support, maintain that there are genuine issues of material fact as to their dependency for support and, therefore, the final summary judgment was improvidently entered.
Upon a review of the record on appeal, we agree with appellants that there are genuine issues of material fact on this issue and, therefore the final summary judgment is reversed.
Reversed.
McNULTY and BOARDMAN, JJ., concur.