PREMIER ATMS, INC., APPELLANT,
v.
DAISY FRESH, 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.
Florida appellate court reversed trial court's judgment and reinstated jury verdict for Premier ATMs, holding that Premier established lost profits with reasonable certainty based on established data rather than speculation.
Lost profits in a breach of contract action may be awarded if established with reasonable certainty based on a reasonable method of computation, even if not calculated with absolute exactness.
[1] Lost profits damages in breach of contract actions need not be calculated with absolute exactness if based on a reasonable method of computation and established with reas…
Previewing 1 of 1 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“if profits can be established with reasonable certainty, they will be allowed”
Standard for awarding lost profits damages in contract cases
Premier ATMs contracted with Daisy Fresh, Inc. to provide ATM processing services. Daisy Fresh breached the contract, and Premier sought damages for l…
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.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Reasonable Certainty In Damages cases and more on FLexlaw
The plaintiff, Premier ATMs (Premier), appeals the trial court’s decision to set aside a jury verdict in its favor and enter judgment for the defendant, Daisy Fresh, Inc., in this breach of contract action involving processing services for ATM machines. The trial court concluded that Premier failed to prove its lost profits with sufficient certainty. We disagree, however, and conclude that Premier established with reasonable certainty each element of its loss and presented damage proof based on established data, rather than on speculation or conjecture. See Massey-Ferguson, Inc. v. Santa Rosa Tractor Co., 415 So.2d 865 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982) (noting that if profits can be established with reasonable certainty, they will be allowed); Jerrico, Inc. v. Washington Nat’l Ins. Co., 400 So.2d 1316, 1318 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981) (finding that damages need not be calculated with absolute exactness so long as they are based on a reasonable method of computation).
Here, in support of its claim, Premier presented evidence of its average interchange fees earned during its months of operation, along with its overhead and operating costs, and testimony as to Premier’s reasonably anticipated profits from projected earnings for the months remaining in the contract. Premier’s damages were calculated on a reasonable basis of computation, and the evidence was sufficient to support the jury’s award of loss of future profits.
Accordingly, we reverse and remand with directions to enter judgment for Premier in accordance with the jury’s verdict.
Reversed and Remanded.
FARMER and TAYLOR, JJ., and LEVENSON, JEFFREY R., Associate Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Massey-Ferguson, Inc. v. Santa Rosa Tractor Co., Inc., 415 So. 2d 865 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982)
- Jerrico, Inc. v. Wash. Nat'l Ins. Co., 400 So. 2d 1316 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981)