Title: Johnson v. Studstill
Citation: 71 So. 2d 251
Docket Number: N/A
State: Florida
Issuer: Florida Supreme Court
Date: March 23, 1954

71 So. 2d 251 (1954)
JOHNSON
v.
STUDSTILL.

Supreme Court of Florida. En Banc.
March 23, 1954.
R.C. Horne, Madison, and H.B. Edwards, Valdosta, Ga., for appellant.
Meginnis, Thompson &amp; Morrison, Tallahassee, and Davis, Davis &amp; McClure, Madison, and Leonard Pepper, of Turnbull &amp; Pepper, Tallahassee, for appellee.
BARNS, Justice.
This cause came on before the trial court to be heard upon a motion by defendant, Howard Studstill, for summary judgment in his favor. Studstill was a co-defendant with Carl Townsend. The motion was granted and the plaintiff-appellant appeals from this judgment of dismissal in favor of defendant, Studstill. In this we find error.
The suit is one at law sounding in tort growing out of an automobile accident. Some of the affidavits tend to show that the automobile at one time owned by Studstill had been sold to Townsend while a counter-affidavit and a letter from the Motor Vehicle Commissioner tend to show that the title to a motor vehicle involved in the accident was owned by Studstill.
Common Law Rule 43(c), 30 F.S.A. like Federal Rule 56(c), 28 U.S.C.A., provides that, in event of a motion for a summary judgment "The judgment sought shall be rendered forthwith if the pleadings, depositions, and admissions on file, together with the affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law."
Judge Fahy, speaking for the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia in Dewey v. Clark, 1950, 86 U.S.App. D.C. 137, 180 F.2d 766 at page 772, summarizes the points to be considered in ruling on a motion for summary judgment, as follows:
Applying the foregoing standards, the judgment appealed is reversed.
TERRELL, Acting Chief Justice, and THOMAS, SEBRING, HOBSON, MATHEWS and DREW, JJ., concur.