Narrative Opinion Summary
The appellate court reversed the summary final judgment regarding General Motors Acceptance Corporation (GMAC) based on the precedent set in Kraemer v. General Motors Acceptance Corp., 572 So.2d 1363 (Fla. 1990), and remanded the case for further proceedings. However, the court affirmed the summary final judgment in favor of GMAC Leasing Corporation. The judges, STONE, WARNER, and GARRETT, concurred with the decision. Additionally, the court treated the appellees’ motion for rehearing as a motion for clarification, which was granted to elucidate the judgment's terms. The final ruling is thus affirmed in part and reversed in part, with remand for further proceedings.
Legal Issues Addressed
Affirmation of Summary Judgmentsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court affirmed the summary final judgment in favor of GMAC Leasing Corporation, upholding the lower court's decision without the need for further proceedings on this aspect.
Reasoning: However, the court affirmed the summary final judgment in favor of GMAC Leasing Corporation.
Partial Affirmation and Reversal with Remandsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The final ruling of the court resulted in a partial affirmation and reversal, with instructions for remand for further proceedings on the reversed aspects.
Reasoning: The final ruling is thus affirmed in part and reversed in part, with remand for further proceedings.
Reversal of Summary Judgment Based on Precedentsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The appellate court reversed the summary final judgment regarding General Motors Acceptance Corporation (GMAC) by applying the precedent set in Kraemer v. General Motors Acceptance Corp., demonstrating the influence of prior case law on current decisions.
Reasoning: The appellate court reversed the summary final judgment regarding General Motors Acceptance Corporation (GMAC) based on the precedent set in Kraemer v. General Motors Acceptance Corp., 572 So.2d 1363 (Fla. 1990), and remanded the case for further proceedings.
Treatment of Motion for Rehearing as Motion for Clarificationsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court treated the appellees' motion for rehearing as a motion for clarification, which was granted to clarify the terms of the judgment.
Reasoning: Additionally, the court treated the appellees’ motion for rehearing as a motion for clarification, which was granted to elucidate the judgment's terms.