YANIV NAKASH, ETC.
v.
COVENANT PALMS ULGM, LLC
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.
Yaniv Nakash and Michael Herskowitz appeal a $1 million joint and several judgment entered after a bench trial in a real property purchase agreement dispute. The trial court found that the parties had formed an enforceable written purchase agreement, that Nakash breached it, and that Herskowitz breached his fiduciary duty as escrow agent by releasing the escrow deposit. The appellate court affirmed the judgment, finding the factual findings supported by competent, substantial evidence and the legal conclusions sound.
The trial court properly found that an enforceable written purchase agreement existed between the parties, that Nakash breached the contract, and that Herskowitz breached his fiduciary duty as escrow agent by releasing the escrow deposit to Nakash without authorization. The $1 million judgment was appropriately entered against both defendants jointly and severally.
[1] Factual findings in contract disputes are reviewed for competent, substantial evidence, while issues of contract interpretation and formation are reviewed de novo.
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“the parties had entered into an enforceable, written purchase agreement, and that the buyer, Nakash, had breached the contract”
Establishes the trial court's core finding that an enforceable contract existed and was breached by the buyer.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceCovenant Palms ULGM, LLC sought to purchase real property in Miami, Florida from defendants Nakash and Herskowitz. The parties entered into a written …
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 Contract Formation cases and more on FLexlaw
Opinion filed May 1, 2024. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________
No. 3D23-1656 Lower Tribunal No. 18-37356
________________
Yaniv Nakash, etc., et al.,
Appellants,
vs.
Covenant Palms ULGM, LLC,
Appellee.
An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, William Thomas, Judge. Assouline & Berlowe, P.A., and Kevin D. Klagge, for appellants. Marva L. Wiley, for appellee. Before SCALES, MILLER, and LOBREE, JJ. PER CURIAM. Appellants, the defendants below, Yaniv Nakash1 and Michael Herskowitz appeal the trial court’s July 21, 2023 final judgment awarding appellee, the plaintiff below, Covenant Palms ULGM, LLC (“Covenant Palms”) a joint and several $1 million judgment against appellants. The principal issue disputed at trial was whether the parties had entered into an enforceable, binding contract for the purchase and sale of real property located in Miami, Florida.
After conducting a bench trial, the trial court entered detailed findings of fact, finding, inter alia, that the parties had entered into an enforceable, written purchase agreement, and that the buyer, Nakash, had breached the contract. The trial court further found that Herskowitz, who served as the escrow agent for the transaction, had breached his fiduciary duty owed to Covenant Palms by releasing the $1 million escrow deposit to Nakash. Each of the trial court’s factual findings are supported by competent, substantial evidence, and our de novo review of the trial court’s legal determinations regarding the contract reveal no error. See Evans v. Diaz, 365 So. 3d 1176, 1178 (Fla. 4th DCA 2023) (“[I]ssues of contract interpretation and formation are reviewed de novo, while factual findings are reviewed for competent, substantial evidence.”). Accordingly, we affirm the July 21, 2023 final judgment.
Affirmed.