As to plaintiff's breach of contract claim, under Florida law, the elements of plaintiff's claim are a valid contract, a material breach and damages. J.J. Gumberg Co. v. Janis Services, Inc., 847 So.2d 1048, 1049 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App. 2003); Collections, U.S.A., Inc. v. City of Homestead, 816 So.2d 1225, 1227 n. 2 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App. 2002). It is undisputed that on December 22, 1997, the plaintiff and the defendant executed the Note. Under the plain terms of the Note, the defendant was required to pay to the plaintiff on December 22, 2002 "[t]he outstanding principal amount evidenced by this Note and all accrued interest thereon." It is undisputed that defendant failed to make the required December 22, 2002 payment.

It is a well-settled principle of Florida law that if there is a factual dispute as to when the last element of the claim accrued and the statute of limitations began to run, the issuance of summary judgment is improper. See Celotex Corp. v. Copeland, 471 So. 2d 533, 539 (Fla. 1985) ; Blinn v. W. Shore Villas of Naples Owners' Ass'n, 182 So. 3d 686, 688 (Fla. 2d DCA 2015) ; Miles Plastering & Assocs., Inc. v. McDevitt & St. Co., 573 So. 2d 931, 932 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991) ; Collections, USA, Inc. v. City of Homestead, 816 So. 2d 1225, 1227 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002). The parties' contract in this case did not specify a time for performance but instead recognized that the time would be left open.

White v. Ferco Motors Corp., 260 So. 3d 388, 390 (Fla. 3d DCA 2018). "We review the record to determine whether there are genuine issues of material fact that preclude summary judgment." Id. (citing Collections, USA, Inc. v. City of Homestead, 816 So. 2d 1225, 1227 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002) ). A careful review of the appellate record reveals genuine issues of material fact as to: (1) whether Ottey's property sustained physical damage consistent with the reported loss; and (2) what caused that damage, if any.

White v. Ferco Motors Corp., 260 So.3d 388 (Fla. 3d DCA 2018). "We review the record to determine whether there are genuine issues of material fact that preclude summary judgment." Id. (citing Collections, USA, Inc. v. City of Homestead, 816 So.2d 1225, 1227 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002) ). Our review of the record discloses genuine issues of material fact regarding whether the interior rain damage exclusion in the homeowners insurance policy precludes coverage for water-damage repairs involved in this case based on the deposition testimony of Blue Star's expert, Rafael Leyva.

We review the record to determine whether there are genuine issues of material fact that preclude summary judgment. Collections, USA, Inc. v. City of Homestead, 816 So.2d 1225, 1227 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002). Our review of the record discloses genuine issues of material fact regarding the condition of the vehicle at the time that it was delivered to White. Specifically, whether Ferco Motors negligently performed an oil change or disconnected the fuses that would have alerted White to an engine problem.

This appeal followed, and we review de novo the trial court's entry of summary judgment. Collections, USA, Inc. v. City of Homestead , 816 So.2d 1225, 1227 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002). Summary judgment is proper only if there is no genuine issue of material fact and if the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Id.

The parties entered into a joint stipulation for entry of final judgment in the amount of $46,335, reserving the right to appeal the judgment. United appeals this judgment, and our standard of review is de novo. Collections USA, Inc. v. City of Homestead, 816 So.2d 1225, 1227 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002). We need not construe the policy at issue in this case, because Valladares' coverage claim was settled when they accepted the $23,000 payment from United.

See Nobles v. City of Jacksonville, 265 So.2d 550, 552 (Fla. 1st DCA 1972). If the record reflects the possibility of a material issue of fact, or if different inferences can be reasonably drawn from the facts, any doubts must be resolved against the moving party. Collections, USA, Inc. v. City of Homestead, 816 So.2d 1225, 1227 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002). See also Floyd v. Department of Children Families, 855 So.2d 204, 205 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003).

The standard of review of a summary final judgment is de novo and requires viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the non-moving party. Collections, USA, Inc. v. City of Homestead, 816 So.2d 1225, 1227 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002). Summary judgment is proper only if there are no genuine issues of material fact, and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Id.

Haroldo J. Montealegre, plaintiff below, appeals a final summary judgment in favor of the defendants, Banco de Credito Centroamericano, S.A., Lafise Bank Limited and Roberto Zamora. Upon review, we conclude that there remains a genuine issue of material fact which precludes entry of summary judgment in this case. See Collections, U.S.A. v. City of Homestead, 816 So.2d 1225 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002). The disputed writing is a one-page, handwritten document executed in the post-dinner glow of a local eatery.