H. E. TOOKE, JR., AND FRANCES G. TOOKE, HIS WIFE, TRADING AND DOING BUSINESS AS SANFORD FRUIT COMPANY, APPELLANTS,
v.
FOSGATE CITRUS CONCENTRATE COOPERATIVE, A COOPERATIVE MARKETING CORPORATION ORGANIZED AND EXISTING UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE; PATRICK FRUIT CORPORATION, A FLORIDA CORPORATION, APPELLANT, V. FOSGATE CITRUS CONCENTRATE COOPERATIVE, A COOPERATIVE MARKETING CORPORATION ORGANIZED AND EXISTING UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA, 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.
Two companion cases involving citrus fruit producers' disputes with a cooperative marketing corporation over payment obligations and stock purchases under marketing and concentrate processing agreements. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed summary judgments in favor of the cooperative in both cases.
The court affirmed both summary judgments, finding that the trial courts correctly interpreted the contracts and that no material issues of fact existed requiring jury determination. The cooperative was entitled to judgment against both appellants.
“In our view these questions have to do with the duties incurred by the parties to the contract with reference to payment for the fruit and purchase of the Class C stock which are more specifically detailed therein.”
Establishes the core legal issue the court addressed: interpretation of contractual duties regarding fruit payment and stock purchases.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceIn the Tooke case, H. E. Tooke, Jr. and Frances G. Tooke, trading as Sanford Fruit Company, entered into a marketing and concentrate processing agreem…
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 Material Issue Of Fact cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
These are companion cases. The facts are not materially different. The only difference, says appellee, is in the terms of the contract between the parties. In the Tooke case, defendants appealed from a summary judgment striking appellants’ counterclaim and granting appellee judgment in the sum of $663.58, plus interest and costs due under a marketing and concentrate processing agreement. In the Patrick case, the appeal is from a judgment for $11,258.97 in favor of the cooperative, Fosgate Citrus Concentrate Cooperative. The cases were argued together in both the Circuit Court and in this court and will be disposed of in one opinion.
As often occurs, the parties are not in accord as to questions presented to us for adjudication. In our view these questions have to do with the duties incurred by the parties to the contract with reference to payment for the fruit and purchase of the Class C stock which are more specifically detailed therein.
We have examined the record and the briefs and as to the Tooke case we think the trial court correctly interpreted the contract, and since there was no material issue of fact requiring the determination of a jury, the award of a summary judgment was proper. As to the Patrick case, we are also of the view that there was no material issue of fact for a jury, that the trial court was correct in so finding and that the award of summary judgment for the plaintiff was proper. It follows that the judgment appealed from in both the Tooke and Patrick cases was correct and is hereby
Affirmed.
DREW, C. J., and TERRELL, HOBSON and THORNAL, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Mainor v. Hobbie, 238 So. 2d 499 (Fla. 1st DCA 1970)…Turnpike Authority v. Michael Baker, Jr., Inc., (Fla.App.1963) 156 So. 2d 198; Pass v. Friedman, (Fla.App.1962) 140 So. 2d 883; Osborne v. Shell Oil Company, (Fla.App.1958) 104 So. 2d 670; Tooke v. Fosgate Citrus Concentrate Co-operative, (Fla.1956) 85 So. 2d 828. CARROLL, DONALD K., Acting C. J., and WIGGINTON, and RAWLS, JJ., concur.…