Leviton v. Philly Steak-Out, Inc.
| Decision Date | 15 November 1988 |
| Docket Number | STEAK-OU,No. 88-120,INC,88-120 |
| Citation | 533 So.2d 905,13 Fla. L. Weekly 2516 |
| Parties | 13 Fla. L. Weekly 2516 Irving LEVITON, Francine Leviton and Notivel Corporation, a Florida corporation, Appellants, v. PHILLYand Philly Steak-Out of America, Inc., Appellees. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Paul D. Mark Lucas, Miami, for appellants.
Cohen, Scherer, Cohn & Silverman and Morris G. Miller, North Palm Beach, for appellees.
Before HUBBART, BASKIN and JORGENSON, JJ.
This is an appeal by the defendants [Irving and Francine Leviton and the Notivel Corporation] from an adverse final summary judgment entered in favor of the plaintiffs [Philly Steak-Out, Inc. and Philly Steak-Out of America, Inc.] on (1) the plaintiffs' suit to recover on a promissory note and to foreclose on a security agreement, and (2) the defendants' counterclaim asserting assorted causes of action arising from the transaction involving the subject promissory note. We affirm.
First, the central point raised on appeal is that the trial court committed reversible error in failing to permit the defendants a reasonable time to complete their discovery prior to considering the plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment. We disagree. The defendants had over seven months from the filing of the complaint to the summary judgment hearing and conducted very little discovery during this time, although the plaintiffs were aggressively engaged in their discovery; we think the defendants had ample time to complete their discovery prior to the summary judgment hearing. In any event, the defendants did not request a continuance of the summary judgment hearing so that they could complete their discovery and cannot now be heard to complain that they were not given a reasonable time to complete same. Steiner v. Ciba-Geigny Corp., 364 So.2d 47, 53 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978), cert. denied, 373 So.2d 461 (Fla.1979); Fuller v. General Motors Corp., 353 So.2d 1236, 1237 (Fla. 3d DCA), cert. denied, 361 So.2d 832 (Fla.1978); Howard v. Shirmer, 334 So.2d 103, 104 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976); Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.510(f).
Second, we find no merit in the defendants' points that their affirmative defenses and counterclaim were never disproved and that numerous issues of fact remained to be resolved. The affirmative defenses were, in fact, either disproved by the depositions, affidavits, and discovery or were legally insufficient to avoid liability on the subject promissory note and security agreement. No genuine issues of material fact remained in the case as to the defendants' answer, affirmative defenses and counterclaim. See Landers v. Milton, 370 So.2d 368, 370 (Fla.1979); Harvey Bldg., Inc. v. Haley, 175 So.2d 780, 783 (Fla.1965); James v. Naumann, 464 So.2d 1260, 1261 (Fla. 2d DCA), rev. denied, 476 So.2d 674 (Fla.1985); Eastland Inv. Co. v. Baker, 344 So.2d 882, 883 (Fla. 3d DCA), appeal dismissed, 354 So.2d 980 (Fla.1977).
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Wong v. Crown Equipment Corp.
...motion for summary judgment. See, e.g., Ultimate Corp. v. CG Data Corp., 575 So.2d 1338 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991); Leviton v. Philly Steak-Out, Inc., 533 So.2d 905 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988); Samuels v. Magnum Realty Corp., 431 So.2d 241 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983); Burns v. Consolidated Am. Ins. Co., 359 So.2d 1......
-
Arthur v. Hillsborough County Bd. of Criminal Justice
...or elsewhere in the record, any obstruction or discovery violation by the Board preventing such discovery. See Leviton v. Philly Steak-Out, Inc., 533 So.2d 905 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988). LEHAN, A.C.J., and FRANK, J., concur. 1 This section provides:Civil action for deprivation of rightsEvery perso......
-
Nichols v. Paulucci, 93-2609
...the additional evidence. See Batista v. Walter & Bernstein, P.A., 378 So.2d 1321 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980). See also Leviton v. Philly Steak-Out, Inc., 533 So.2d 905 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988). We also note that NTS's and Nichols' claim of procedural prejudice is weakened by their decision on appeal to re......
-
Cong. Park Office Condos II, LLC v. First–Citizens Bank & Trust Co.
...the non-moving party has failed to act diligently in taking advantage of discovery opportunities. See, e.g., Leviton v. Philly Steak–Out, Inc., 533 So.2d 905, 906 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988) (affirming a trial court's order granting summary judgment despite the pendency of discovery where the defend......
-
Chapter 12-1 Introduction
...examination).[83] See Titusville Assoc. v. Barnett Banks Trust Co., 591 So. 2d 609, 610 (Fla. 1991); Leviton v. Philly Steak-Out, Inc., 533 So. 2d 905, 906 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988) (noting that when a party does not "request a continuance of the summary judgment hearing so that they could complet......