MARK MACONI HOMES OF TAMPA BAY, INC., APPELLANT,
v.
J. STEVEN KECK AND ANGELA C. KECK, APPELLEES
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.
Mark Maconi Homes appealed a summary judgment granting the Kecks rescission of a home purchase contract based on Maconi's failure to provide a required property report under the Interstate Land Sales Full Disclosure Act. The court reversed, holding that the Kecks failed to meet their burden on summary judgment by not refuting Maconi's claim that the sale was exempt from the Act's requirements.
The Kecks were not entitled to summary judgment because although they established that Maconi did not provide a property report, they failed to refute Maconi's affidavits claiming the sale was exempt from the Act's registration and disclosure requirements. If the sale was exempt, Maconi had no obligation to provide a report and rescission was not warranted.
[1] A party moving for summary judgment has the burden to conclusively demonstrate that the nonmoving party cannot prevail.
[2] Summary judgment is improper when the moving party fails to refute the nonmoving party's claim that the transaction was exempt from statutory requirements.
Previewing 2 of 4 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“The movant has the burden to demonstrate conclusively that the nonmoving party cannot prevail.”
Establishes the legal standard for summary judgment and who bears the burden of proof
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceMaconi, a homebuilder, owned a lot in Longleaf subdivision in Pasco County and contracted with the Kecks to build a residence. After construction was …
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 Interstate Land Sales Full Disclosure Act cases and more on FLexlaw
Mark Maconi Homes of Tampa Bay, Inc., appeals a final summary judgment entered in favor of Steven and Angela C. Keck. Because we conclude that the Kecks did not meet their burden to establish that they were entitled to judgment as a matter of law, we reverse.
Maconi is a homebuilder that owned a single lot in Longleaf, a development in Pasco County. The lot was located in Longleaf Neighborhood Three, a fully developed subdivision within Longleaf. The Kecks purchased the lot and contracted with Maconi to build a residence on it. After Maconi finished building the home, the Kecks sought to rescind the contract alleging that prior to selling them the lot, Maconi had not provided them with a written property report as required by section 1703(c) of the Interstate Land Sales Full Disclosure Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1701-1720 (the Act). The Kecks offered to forgo rescission if Maconi would reduce the price of the home by several hundred thousand dollars. Maconi rejected the Kecks’ attempt to get out of their contract and notified them that they were obligated to close in accordance with the terms of the *825contract. The Kecks refused to close and subsequently sued Maconi seeking rescission of the contract, return of their deposit, and attorney’s fees and costs.
Relying on Maconi’s failure to provide a property report, the Kecks moved for summary judgment on their claim for rescission. In opposition to the motion, Maconi filed affidavits intended to establish that it was not obligated to provide the report because the subdivision was exempt from the Act’s registration and disclosure requirements. After a hearing, the trial court entered final summary judgment in favor of the Kecks.
We review an order granting summary judgment de novo. Volusia County v. Aberdeen at Ormond Beach, L.P., 760 So.2d 126 (Fla.2000). “Summary judgment is proper if there is no genuine issue of material fact and if the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law.” Id. at 130. The movant has the burden to demonstrate conclusively that the nonmoving party cannot prevail. Valk v. J.E.M. Distribs. of Tampa Bay, Inc., 700 So.2d 416, 419 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997). The Kecks failed to meet their burden. While they did establish that Maconi did not provide them with a property report, they failed to refute Maconi’s claim that the sale was exempt from the Act’s requirements. If the sale of the lot was exempt, Maconi was not obligated to provide a property report, and the Kecks are not entitled to rescission. Accordingly, we reverse the summary judgment entered in favor of the Kecks and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
Reversed and remanded.
ALTENBERND and NORTHCUTT, JJ., Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Volusia Cnty. v. Aberdeen AT Ormond Beach, L.P., 760 So. 2d 126 (Fla. 2000)
- Inversiones Armadeni, S.A. v. Tejedo, 700 So. 2d 416 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997)
- Valk v. J.E.M. Distribs. OF Tampa BAY, Inc., 700 So. 2d 416 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997)