History
  • No items yet
midpage
Simcox v. Wiggins
557 So. 2d 56
Fla. Dist. Ct. App.
1989
Check Treatment
PER CURIAM.

Appellants Marion and Mary Simcox, defendants below, appeal a summary final judgment against them in an action to recover legal fees. We reverse.

The Simcoxes answered the complaint, and pled several affirmative defenses, including recoupment. Plaintiff/appellee Wiggins & Wiggins, P.A., moved for summary judgment. Wiggins argued that re-coupment was not a good defense, reasoning that the claim of recoupment was barred by the statute of limitations. On that issue Wiggins was in error. See Allie v. Ionata, 503 So.2d 1237, 1239-40 (Fla.1987). It follows that, at least on the present record, the recoupment defense was not negated, see Emile v. First Nat’l Bank of Miami, 126 So.2d 305, 306-07 (Fla. 3d DCA 1961), and summary judgment should not have been entered.

Reversed.

Case Details

Case Name: Simcox v. Wiggins
Court Name: District Court of Appeal of Florida
Date Published: Dec 12, 1989
Citation: 557 So. 2d 56
Docket Number: No. 88-1722
Court Abbreviation: Fla. Dist. Ct. App.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.