Florida
How Adickes v. S.H. Kress & Co. applies in Florida: state-specific rules, key cases, and bar exam notes for Civil Procedure.
Florida adheres to the principle established in Adickes regarding the adequacy of evidence for establishing a genuine issue of material fact. In Florida, a party opposing a summary judgment must present sufficient evidence to demonstrate that there is a genuine dispute for trial.
In Florida, the rule governing summary judgment is found in Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.510, which requires that the party moving for summary judgment show there is no genuine issue of material fact and that they are entitled to judgment as a matter of law.
The court emphasized the burden on the party opposing summary judgment to produce evidence sufficient to create a genuine issue of material fact.
This case reaffirmed that merely raising issues in a motion to oppose summary judgment is not enough without supporting evidence.
The Florida Supreme Court held that the party moving for summary judgment bears the initial burden but once that burden is met, the opposing party must come forward with sufficient evidence.
Florida's approach to summary judgment partially mirrors the federal standard set forth in Rule 56, emphasizing the necessity for evidence to dispute material facts. However, Florida law places a more stringent burden on the party opposing summary judgment, which may require more concrete evidence earlier in the legal process.
Understanding the application of Adickes principles in Florida is important for the Florida bar exam, especially in questions related to civil procedure and summary judgment.