Schwartz v. Maimin Co., Inc.

Full title: HAROLD SCHWARTZ AND RITA SCHWARTZ, HIS WIFE, APPELLANTS, v. H. MAIMIN CO.…

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District

Date published: May 20, 1988

523 So. 2d 1224 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1988)

Opinion

No. 87-0003.

April 13, 1988. Rehearing Denied May 20, 1988.

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Broward County; Frank Orlando, Judge.

Arnold R. Ginsberg of Horton, Perse Ginsberg and Ansel Simon Cohn, Miami, for appellants.

Richard A. Sherman of Richard A. Sherman, P.A., and Wayne W. Pomeroy of Pomeroy, Pomeroy Pomeroy, Fort Lauderdale, for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

We reverse the summary final judgment entered in favor of Defendant, H. Maimin Co., Inc., and remand for further proceedings. We do this because there is existent a genuine issue of material fact which precludes summary disposition. That issue is the date of the delivery of the fabric cutting machine in question, which date triggers the running and applicability of section 95.031(2), Florida Statutes (1985).

REVERSED and REMANDED.

HERSEY, C.J., and DELL and WALDEN, JJ., concur.