J. FREDERICK BLITSTEIN AND BLITSTEIN INVESTMENTS, INC., APPELLANTS,
v.
INTERVISA CORPORATION, TRUSTEE ON BEHALF OF BONEFISH YACHT CLUB, LTD., AND INTERVISA CORPORATION, APPELLEES
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Repudiation Of Contract cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
It is well settled that one may not simultaneously repudiate a contract for conducting a business venture — here, by recovering compensatory damages in the amount of the sum invested and punitive damages based on fraudulent inducement — and also secure the recovery of lost profits which presupposes the continued existence of the agreement. Noord v. Katz, 481 So. 2d 1228 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985); Deemer v. Hallett Pontiac, Inc., 288 So. 2d 526 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974), cert. denied, 298 So. 2d 416 (Fla.1974); Hauser v. Van Zile, 269 So. 2d 396 (Fla. 4th DCA 1972). In accordance with this principle, the judgment under review is reduced by the $200,000 found by the jury to be recoverable for lost profits. Since we find no other error, the judgment is otherwise affirmed.
Affirmed as modified.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Deemer v. Hallett Pontiac, Inc., 288 So. 2d 526 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974)
- Van Der Noord v. Katz, 481 So. 2d 1228 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985)
- Carleton E. Hauser and Betty Jo Hauser v. van Zile, 269 So. 2d 396 (Fla. 4th DCA 1972)
- Bunker v. S. Bell Tel. & Tel. Co., 298 So. 2d 416 (Fla. 1974)
- Dawson v. ITT Cont'l Baking Co., 298 So. 2d 416 (Fla. 1974)