Hulley v. Cape Kennedy Leasing Corp., 78-1362
| Decision Date | 31 October 1979 |
| Docket Number | No. 78-1362,78-1362 |
| Citation | 376 So.2d 884 |
| Parties | David L. HULLEY, Appellant, v. CAPE KENNEDY LEASING CORPORATION, a Florida Corporation, et al., Appellees. /NT4-43. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Paul Hagglund of Hagglund, Mangino & Hagglund, P.A., New Smyrna Beach, for appellant.
John M. Starling of Crofton, Holland, Starling, Harris & Severs, P.A., Titusville, for appellee Cape Kennedy Leasing Corp. POWELL, ROM W., Associate Judge.
The salient facts necessary to the disposition of this appeal are as follows. Appellee Cape Kennedy Leasing Corporation as lessor brought suit against appellant David L. Hulley and other lessees on a written lease of certain real property. One count of the complaint alleged a breach of the lease due to lessees' failure to make certain rent and other payments. Another count sought to foreclose a mortgage on other property owned by one of the other lessees which had been given as a deposit to secure a certain amount of the rent payments to be made under the lease. Appellant Hulley filed an answer generally denying the breach of the lease and setting up three affirmative defenses. Appellee filed a reply generally denying each affirmative defense coupled with a motion to strike each defense on the ground that each was insufficient. The motion to strike was granted as to each defense. Appellee then filed a motion for summary judgment with supporting affidavits. No discovery by way of depositions, interrogatories or requests for admission of facts had been taken by any party. At this stage of the proceedings, and on this state of the record, appellee's motion for summary judgment was granted as to Hulley, and final judgment was entered against him from which he takes this appeal. We find error and reverse.
Appellant Hulley contends that the lower court erred in striking his three affirmative defenses. As to his first and second affirmative defenses, we agree. The first affirmative defense alleged a resumption of possession by appellee for its exclusive use with intent to terminate the lease. If proven, this would constitute a defense to the recovery of rents accruing after appellee's resumption of possession. Geiger Mutual Agency, Inc. v. Wright, 233 So.2d 444 (Fla. 4th DCA 1970). The second affirmative defense, although not artfully drawn, alleged a retaking by appellee as agent of appellants and a reletting by virtue of which appellants claimed a set-off. These two affirmative defenses were, we believe, sufficiently pled to withstand appellee's motion to strike them. Striking of pleadings is not favored and is an action to be used sparingly by the courts, with any doubts to be resolved in favor of the pleadings. Bay Colony Office Bldg. Joint Venture v. Wachovia Mortgage Co., 342 So.2d 1005 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977). Where, as here, a defense is legally sufficient on its face and presents a bona fide issue of fact, it is improper to grant a motion to strike. C & S Realty Investors v. Lastition, 332 So.2d 357 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976); Pentecostal Holiness Church, Inc. v. Mauney, 270 So.2d 762 (Fla. 4th DCA 1973).
It is axiomatic that summary judgment cannot be...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hudson Pest Control, Inc. v. Westford Asset Management, Inc.
...Razook, 571 So.2d 596 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990); Colonial Promenade v. Juhas, 541 So.2d 1313 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989); Hulley v. Cape Kennedy Leasing Corp., 376 So.2d 884 (Fla. 5th DCA 1979); Babsdon Co. v. Thrifty Packing Co.; Diehl v. Gibbs, 173 So.2d 719 (Fla. 1st DCA 1965); Katz v. Kenholtz, 147 So......
-
Griffin Indus., LLC v. Dixie Southland Corp.
...Inc. v. Cymet, 510 So.2d 1021 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987) ; Wolf v. Buchman, 425 So.2d 182 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983) ; Hulley v. Cape Kennedy Leasing Corp., 376 So.2d 884 (Fla. 5th DCA 1979) ; Jimmy Hall's Morningside, Inc. v. Blackburn & Peck Enters., Inc., 235 So.2d 344 (Fla. 2d DCA 1970) ).Here, Dixie e......
-
HOLIDAY FURNITURE FACTORY OUT. CORP. v. STATE DEPT. OF …, No. 1D02-2215
...Paris, Inc. v. Cymet, 510 So.2d 1021 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987); Wolf v. Buchman, 425 So.2d 182 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); Hulley v. Cape Kennedy Leasing Corp., 376 So.2d 884 (Fla. 5th DCA 1979); Jimmy Hall's Morningside, Inc. v. Blackburn & Peck Enters., Inc., 235 So.2d 344 (Fla. 2d DCA 1970). Holiday Fu......
-
Gonzalez v. Nafh Nat'l Bank
...on its face and presents a bona fide issue of fact, it is improper to grant a motion to strike.” Hulley v. Cape Kennedy Leasing Corp., 376 So.2d 884, 885 (Fla. 5th DCA 1979) (citations omitted); Citizens & S. Realty Investors v. Lastition, 332 So.2d 357, 358 (Fl. 4th DCA 1976) (reversing an......
-
Chapter 7-3 Affirmative Defenses
...Wilmington Sav. Fund Soc'y, FSB v. Contreras, 278 So. 3d 744, 747-48 (Fla. 5th DCA 2019).[106] Hulley v. Cape Kennedy Leasing Corp., 376 So. 2d 884, 885 (Fla. 5th DCA 1979).[107] Burns v. Equilease Corp., 357 So. 2d 786, 787 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978).[108] Hulley v. Cape Kennedy Leasing Corp., 376......
-
Chapter 7-3 Affirmative Defenses
...2019 Fla. App. LEXIS 11698, 2019 WL 3366143, No. 5D18-2401 (Fla. 5th DCA July 26, 2019).[97] Hulley v. Cape Kennedy Leasing Corp., 376 So. 2d 884, 885 (Fla. 5th DCA 1979).[98] Burns v. Equilease Corp., 357 So. 2d 786, 787 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978).[99] Hulley v. Cape Kennedy Leasing Corp., 376 So.......