MICHAEL LALLY
v.
AIM RECOVERY SERVICES, INC.
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.
A party asserting duress as a contract defense must demonstrate unlawful constraint or compulsion that prevented the exercise of free will, and a party is bound by a contract unless prevented from reading it or induced by the other party not to read it.
[1] Duress as a contract defense requires proof that the party was unlawfully constrained or compelled to perform an act under circumstances preventing the exercise of free w…
[2] A party is bound by a signed contract unless the party can show that he was prevented from reading it or was induced by the other party to refrain from reading it.
Previewing 2 of 2 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“Duress involves a step beyond mere illegality and implies that a person has been unlawfully constrained or compelled by another to perform an act under circumstances which prevent the exercise of free will.”
Explaining the legal standard for duress as a contract defense
Michael Lally appealed a circuit court decision in Miami-Dade County regarding a contract dispute with AIM Recovery Services, Inc. The case involved 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 Free Will cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Affirmed. See In re Amends. to Fla. Rule of Civ. Proc. 1.510, 317 So. 3d 72, 77–78 (Fla. 2021) (“In cases where a summary judgment motion was denied under the pre-amendment rule, the court should give the parties a reasonable opportunity to file a renewed summary judgment motion under the new rule.”); see also Woodruff v. TRG-Harbour House, Ltd., 967 So. 2d 248, 250 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007) (explaining that “[d]uress involves a step beyond mere illegality and implies that a person has been unlawfully constrained or compelled by another to perform an act under circumstances which prevent the exercise of free will”) (internal quotation and citation omitted); Estate of Etting v. Regents Park at Aventura, Inc., 891 So. 2d 558, 558 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004) (“It has long been held in Florida that one is bound by his contract. Unless one can show facts and circumstances to demonstrate that he was prevented from reading the contract, or that he was induced by statements of the other party to refrain from reading the contract it is binding.”) (citation omitted).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- The Est. OF Helen N. Etting v. Regents Park AT Aventura, Inc., 891 So. 2d 558 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004)