REID B. HUGHES, APPELLANT,
v.
HUGHES ENERGY, INC., APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Reid Hughes appeals a non-final order determining liability for hazardous contamination at a gas station site in favor of Hughes Energy, Inc. The court vacates and remands because the trial court improperly relied on Hughes's stipulation to lease termination to determine liability, without actually determining when the contamination occurred or which party was responsible under the assignment agreement.
The court held that Hughes's stipulation to lease termination is not dispositive of the liability issue between Hughes and Energy. The trial court improperly determined Energy's liability without resolving the critical question of when the contamination occurred and which party was in possession at that time.
[1] A stipulation to terminate a leasehold interest is not dispositive of the issue of responsibility for contamination occurring during the leasehold between a former lessee…
[2] An order determining liability in favor of a party seeking affirmative relief is a non-final order that may be appealed.
Previewing 2 of 3 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“Hughes' stipulation that allowed summary termination of the lease by the lessor is not dispositive of the issue between Hughes and Energy, to wit: when did the contamination occur, who was in possession of the leasehold at the time of contamination, and who is responsible for the cleanup?”
Establishes that the stipulation to lease termination does not resolve the separate liability issue between the two parties regarding responsibility for contamination.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceHughes previously owned a leasehold interest in a gas station site and assigned it to Hughes Energy in August 1987. The assignment allocated responsib…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
[*102] PER CURIAM.
Reid B. Hughes (Hughes) appeals a non-final order determining the issue of liability in favor of Hughes Energy, Inc., (Energy) a party seeking affirmative relief.1 We vacate the order and remand for further proceedings.
The issue before the trial court between the parties to this appeal concerned their responsibility for hazardous materials that contaminated a gas station site. Hughes had previously owned a leasehold interest in the site but assigned it to Energy in August, 1987. The assignment allocated responsibility for any contamination that occurred before the assignment to Hughes and for any contamination that occurred after the assignment to Energy. Storage and distribution of gasoline on the site continued after the assignment until 1992. At some point in time, the site became contaminated, causing the gasoline storage tanks to be abandoned and filled with inert material in 1993. Whether the contamination occurred prior or subsequent to the assignment of the leasehold interest from Hughes to Energy has never been determined in the proceedings before the trial court.
This litigation began when the lessor of the contaminated site brought an action to terminate the lease when the lessee breached its terms by failing to eliminate the contamination. In that action, the trial court terminated the lease and awarded possession to the lessor, after Hughes, who was no longer a lessee, inexplicably stipulated to the termination. Apparently the trial court then found Hughes to be the party responsible for the contamination based only upon his stipulation for termination of leasehold. However, Hughes’ stipulation that allowed summary termination of the lease by the lessor is not dispositive of the issue between Hughes and Energy, to wit: when did the contamination occur, who was in possession of the leasehold at the time of contamination, and who is responsible for the cleanup? The issue raised in both Hughes’ and Energy’s complaints, determination of the party who breached the lease by the contamination, has not been resolved and we remand for that determination and an award of damages if appropriate.
ORDER VACATED; REMANDED.
GOSHORN, PETERSON and ANTOON, JJ., concur. . Fla. R.App. P. 9.130(a)(3)(C)(iv).