Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Gallardo v. Tower Hill Signature Ins. Co., 17-0388 (2017)

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida Number: 17-0388 Visitors: 7
Filed: Oct. 18, 2017
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida Opinion filed October 18, 2017. _ No. 3D17-388 Lower Tribunal No. 15-14701 _ Marlene Gallardo, Appellant, vs. Tower Hill Signature Insurance Company, Appellee. An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Jorge E. Cueto, Judge. Mario Serralta & Associates and Mario Serralta, for appellant. Methe & Rockenbach and Kara Berard Rockenbach (West Palm Beach), for appellee. Before LAGOA, EMAS and SCALES, JJ. PER CURIAM. Marlene Gallardo appea
More
       Third District Court of Appeal
                              State of Florida

                        Opinion filed October 18, 2017.

                              ________________

                                No. 3D17-388
                         Lower Tribunal No. 15-14701
                             ________________


                            Marlene Gallardo,
                                  Appellant,

                                      vs.

              Tower Hill Signature Insurance Company,
                                   Appellee.



      An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Jorge E. Cueto,
Judge.

     Mario Serralta & Associates and Mario Serralta, for appellant.

      Methe & Rockenbach and Kara Berard Rockenbach (West Palm Beach), for
appellee.


Before LAGOA, EMAS and SCALES, JJ.

     PER CURIAM.
      Marlene Gallardo appeals the trial court’s entry of final summary judgment

in favor of appellee, Tower Hill Signature Insurance Company.

      Appellee properly and commendably concedes error in light of this court’s

recent decisions Siegel v. Tower Hill Signature Ins. Co., No. 3D16-1861 (Fla. 3d

DCA Aug. 30, 2017) and Francis v. Tower Hill Prime Ins. Co., 42 Fla. L. Weekly

D1565 (Fla. 3d DCA July 12, 2017), each of which was issued after the trial

court’s entry of judgment in the instant case.

      Given appellee’s concession of error, and upon our own review of the record

in this case, genuine issues of material fact remain in dispute and we therefore

reverse the final summary judgment and remand for further proceedings.




                                          2

Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer