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.

B & P Liquors, Inc. v. Munder

Citations: 654 So. 2d 307; 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 5056; 1995 WL 271490Docket: No. 94-1363

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida; May 10, 1995; Florida; State Appellate Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

B. P Liquors, Inc. appeals a summary final judgment that was unfavorable to it in previous proceedings. The appellate court affirms the summary judgment regarding the claims of fraud and oral contract. However, the court reverses the judgment concerning the civil theft claim, determining that the applicable statute of limitations is five years, which means the civil theft claim is not time-barred. The court's decision results in an affirmation in part, a reversal in part, and a remand with directions to reinstate the civil theft claim.

Legal Issues Addressed

Appellate Court's Authority to Remand

Application: The appellate court exercises its authority to remand the case with specific directions to reinstate the civil theft claim, reflecting its power to modify lower court judgments.

Reasoning: The court's decision results in an affirmation in part, a reversal in part, and a remand with directions to reinstate the civil theft claim.

Civil Theft Claim and Statute of Limitations

Application: The appellate court reverses the summary judgment on the civil theft claim, ruling that the applicable statute of limitations is five years, thereby allowing the claim to proceed.

Reasoning: However, the court reverses the judgment concerning the civil theft claim, determining that the applicable statute of limitations is five years, which means the civil theft claim is not time-barred.

Summary Judgment in Fraud and Oral Contract Claims

Application: The appellate court affirms the summary final judgment against B. P Liquors, Inc. regarding claims of fraud and oral contract, indicating that the lower court's decision was correct on these issues.

Reasoning: The appellate court affirms the summary judgment regarding the claims of fraud and oral contract.