Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 113 views

    Judge's Hendry County Monkey Farm Lawsuit Order

    Uploaded by

    News-Press
    Instead of ending a high-profile lawsuit over two Hendry County monkey farms, a judge had ruled the case will go to trial.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content

    You might also like

    Judge's Hendry County Monkey Farm Lawsuit Order

    Uploaded by

    News-Press
    113 views3 pages
    Instead of ending a high-profile lawsuit over two Hendry County monkey farms, a judge had ruled the case will go to trial.

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Instead of ending a high-profile lawsuit over two Hendry County monkey farms, a judge had ruled the case will go to trial.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    113 views3 pages

    Judge's Hendry County Monkey Farm Lawsuit Order

    Uploaded by

    News-Press
    Instead of ending a high-profile lawsuit over two Hendry County monkey farms, a judge had ruled the case will go to trial.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 3
    IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE TWENTIETH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR HENDRY COUNTY, FLORIDA, WILLIAM STEPHENS, CAROL GREY, and KEELY CINKOTA Plaintis, vs. CASE NO.: 2014-CA-633, na HENDRY COUNTY 8 Defendant. / t ORDER DENYING BOTH PLAINTIFF'S AND DEFENDANT'S= MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT =| 8 This cause having come on to be heard on the 15th day of December 2615, upona™ 2 LOH Hd C1 WYP 9100 Motion for Summary Judgment filed by the Plaintiffs and a Motion for Summary Judgment filed by the Defendant, and the Court having heard the argument of counsel, conducted extensive legal research, and being otherwise duly advised in the premises, finds as follows: fh Both the Plaintiff and the Defendant in their Motion for Summary Judgment argue that there are no justiciable issues of law or fact which remain for the court's determination. Given the nature of a motion for summary judgment, itis impossible for both sides to be correct in their assertion, It is well settled law, that a court should deny a motion for summary judgment if there is in dispute and can only be il Procedure a demonstrable genuine issue of fact or law which remait determined after the holding of a trial on that issue. Florida Rules of Ci 1.510, requires the entry of a summary judgment when the "pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, admissions, affidavits and other materials as would be admissible in evidence on file, show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter law." A movant for summary judgment has the initial burden of demonstrating the absence of a genuine issue as to any material fact. Almand Construction Company, Inc., v. Evans, 547 So.2d 626(1989) Once a movant tenders competent evidence to support its motion "the opposing party must come forward with counter-evidence sufficient to reveal a genuine 10. issue" of material fact. Landers v. Milton, 370 So.2d 368, 370(1979). "It is not enough for the opposing party merely to assert that an issue does exist" I ‘The Plaintiff has filed an action alleging that the Defendant violated the provisions of Fla. Stat. §286.011(1), which is commonly referred as the Sunshine Law. The Sunshine Law was not intended to permit the courts to question or review the ‘wisdom of the law, whether that law will be embraced by the general public or any other matter other than the ‘egality surrounding the action taken by the public body, and ‘whether that action comported with the provisions of the Sunshine Law, Therefore, this Court restricted its examination to issues directly related to allegations of violations of the Sunshine Law, and not to any ancillary arguments which may have been raised. ‘This Court then examined the relevant arguments of the parties related directly to the alleged violation of the Sunshine Law. Unfortunately, the testimony offered to the Court ‘was composed of snippets of depositions and selected correspondence, letters. It is

    You might also like