You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Hyde Shipping Corp. v. Concreto Asfaltico Nacional, S.A.

Citations: 507 So. 2d 776; 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 8450; 12 Fla. L. Weekly 1328Docket: No. 86-2237

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida; May 26, 1987; Florida; State Appellate Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

Hyde Shipping Corporation (Hyde) appeals a final summary judgment favoring Concreto Asfáltico Nacional, S.A. (CAN), arguing that the trial court erred by not recognizing that their affirmative defenses created material factual disputes. The appellate court agrees, noting that summary judgment is only appropriate when all affirmative defenses are conclusively refuted. Hyde's defenses included claims of criminal intervention by a third party and limitations of liability under contractual and federal statutes, specifically the Carriage of Goods by Sea Act. The court highlighted that unresolved issues remained regarding the alleged criminal intervention, which could potentially absolve Hyde of liability if it meets the requisite standard of care for a bailee. Since CAN did not conclusively refute all of Hyde's defenses, the trial court's summary judgment was deemed erroneous. The appellate court reversed the judgment and remanded the case for further proceedings.

Legal Issues Addressed

Affirmative Defenses in Summary Judgment

Application: Affirmative defenses must be conclusively refuted by the party moving for summary judgment to preclude trial.

Reasoning: Hyde appeals a final summary judgment favoring Concreto Asfáltico Nacional, S.A. (CAN), arguing that the trial court erred by not recognizing that their affirmative defenses created material factual disputes.

Criminal Intervention by Third Party as a Defense

Application: The defense of criminal intervention by a third party must be resolved as it could absolve the defendant of liability if the standard of care for a bailee is met.

Reasoning: Hyde's defenses included claims of criminal intervention by a third party and limitations of liability under contractual and federal statutes.

Limitations of Liability under the Carriage of Goods by Sea Act

Application: The limitations of liability defense under the Carriage of Goods by Sea Act must be conclusively addressed in summary judgment proceedings.

Reasoning: Hyde's defenses included claims ... and limitations of liability under contractual and federal statutes, specifically the Carriage of Goods by Sea Act.

Remand for Further Proceedings

Application: A case may be remanded for further proceedings if the appellate court finds that summary judgment was inappropriately granted due to unresolved factual issues.

Reasoning: The appellate court reversed the judgment and remanded the case for further proceedings.

Standard for Granting Summary Judgment

Application: Summary judgment is appropriate only when there are no unresolved material factual disputes and all defenses are conclusively refuted.

Reasoning: The appellate court agrees, noting that summary judgment is only appropriate when all affirmative defenses are conclusively refuted.