-
480 F.2d 1112·
9th Cir.·
1973-06-19
·cited 2×
A seller's anticipatory repudiation of a real estate contract, even if in bad faith, does not preclude the buyer from recovering damages, and the return of the buyer's deposit does not constitute an exclusive remedy.
-
374 F.2d 683·
10th Cir.·
1967-03-20
·cited 2×
The court held that the railroad's conveyance of surface rights for highway purposes, while preventing continued railroad use, did not constitute abandonment as a matter of law because the impossibility of use was due to external factors, not voluntary intent to abandon.
-
356 F.2d 651·
3d Cir.·
1966-01-27
·cited 2×
The appellate court reviewed an order declaring stock, held in trust for minor children, amenable to execution to satisfy a judgment against their parents, the judgment debtors.
-
338 F.2d 994·
4th Cir.·
1964-11-17
·cited 2×
The court held that an employer may contractually agree to supplement workmen's compensation benefits, and such a contract is enforceable if it does not violate state law or become impossible to perform.
-
220 F.2d 844·
5th Cir.·
1955-04-06
·cited 2×
The court held that the buyer's delay in purchasing replacement cotton was reasonable and that the seller failed to prove the buyer could have mitigated damages by purchasing earlier.
-
132 F.2d 457·
7th Cir.·
1942-12-30
·cited 2×
The court held that the contract was limited to the specific cabinet discussed and that circumstances beyond the parties' control rendered performance impossible for subsequent models.
-
306 So. 3d 1117·
Fla. 3d DCA·
2020-08-19
·cited 1×
The appellate court reversed a lower court's order that extended deadlines in a mediated settlement agreement. The court held that the trial court exceeded its limited jurisdiction by modifying the terms of the agreement, which the parties had entered into voluntarily.
-
148 So. 3d 517·
Fla. 2d DCA·
2014-10-08
·cited 1×
This case involves an appeal by Palmetto Surety Corporation after a trial court denied its request for remission of a forfeited bond. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's decision, finding the surety did not provide sufficient evidence of its efforts to apprehend the de
-
907 So. 2d 1247·
Fla. 3d DCA·
2005-07-27
·cited 1×
Court affirmed denial of mandamus petition seeking trial transcripts from a former public defender, holding that mandamus cannot compel production of documents the defender no longer possesses.
-
896 So. 2d 926·
Fla. 1st DCA·
2005-03-04
·cited 1×
An 18-year-old with Down syndrome sought developmental disabilities services from the Florida Department of Children and Family Services. The court held that lack of funding constitutes an affirmative defense that DCF must prove, and reversed the agency's denial of benefits becau
-
969 F.2d 764·
9th Cir.·
1992-06-30
·cited 1×
The court held that Gould, Inc. was not the alter ego of the award debtor and affirmed its dismissal, but vacated and remanded the specific performance portion of the award due to unresolved issues regarding U.S. export restrictions and Treasury regulations.
-
487 So. 2d 43·
Fla. 2d DCA·
1986-03-14
·cited 1×
Montez Howard contracted to purchase a liquor license from Irene Kinard for $42,500, but a third party's restraining order prevented the transfer. After the restraining order was dissolved, Kinard sold the license to the Metcalfs instead. Howard sued for breach and specific perfo
-
385 So. 2d 1074·
Fla. 3d DCA·
1980-06-17
·cited 1×
Elliott, individually and as officer of dissolved corporations, leased equipment from Sheridan under agreements requiring him to assume all risk of loss. When his military base concessions were cancelled due to non-payment, the government seized the equipment. The court affirmed
-
210 So. 2d 721·
Fla. 4th DCA·
1968-05-23
·cited 1×
In a post-divorce contempt proceeding, an ex-wife sought to enforce a property settlement agreement requiring her ex-husband to maintain medical insurance coverage. The trial court denied her motion for a rule to show cause, finding the husband incapable of compliance because the
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-09-03
The court held that the plaintiff established all elements for rescission of the commercial lease due to the defendant's failure to complete the landlord's work, entitling the plaintiff to summary judgment.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2024-11-26
Summary judgment is denied for both parties because genuine issues of material fact exist regarding whether the insured's failure to provide timely notice and cooperation prejudiced the insurer, and whether the policy provisions are ambiguous.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2024-03-06
The court granted summary judgment for Capital Jazz on RCCL's breach of contract claim (Count II) because RCCL failed to demonstrate damages, and granted summary judgment for RCCL on Capital Jazz's failure to mitigate and failure to state a claim affirmative defenses. Summary jud
-
M.D. Fla.·
2023-12-01
The court held that the plaintiff's claims for breach of contract and unjust enrichment fail because the alleged events do not meet the contract's 'impossibility' clause and an express contract precludes unjust enrichment.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2023-10-13
The court denied Miami-Dade County's motion for leave to file a third-party complaint because the proposed claims were untimely, separate from the main action, and would unduly complicate and delay the litigation.
-
Del. Super. Ct.·
2023-10-05
The court held that summary judgment in favor of Dover Mall, LLC was appropriate. The commercial lease's force majeure provision allocated the risk of pandemic-related government closures to the tenant, Mr. Tang, precluding his defenses of frustration of purpose and impossibility
-
S.D. Fla.·
2022-11-28
The court held that unjust enrichment and breach of contract counterclaims were properly dismissed with prejudice, but claims for breach of the implied warranty of seaworthiness and breach of warranty were adequately pled and survived the motion to dismiss.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2022-09-13
The court held that Sheridan Healthcare, not being a party to the contracts, cannot be liable for breach of contract, and that the COVID-19 pandemic did not render performance impossible or frustrate the purpose of the contracts.
-
Fla. 2d DCA·
2022-08-19
The appellate court reversed a lower court's order granting remission of a bail bond. The court held that remission was improper because the defendant's return to the jurisdiction was not met and his prosecution was thwarted by his own actions leading to federal charges.
-
Fla. 1st DCA·
2022-06-29
The appellate court affirmed a trial court's summary judgment, ruling that the force majeure clause in a vacant land sale contract did not apply to the buyer's inability to obtain rezoning approval due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The court found the pandemic did not prevent perform
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-05-26
The court granted the motion to dismiss, finding plaintiffs failed to state plausible claims for rescission and breach of contract.
-
Fla. 1st DCA·
2022-05-25
The appellate court reversed a trial court's award of attorney's fees, finding that a proposal for settlement requiring $1.3 million in cash within thirty days was not made in good faith. The court held that such an offer was illusory and impossible to accept, thus contravening t
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-03-01
The court held that plaintiffs failed to state claims for rescission and breach of contract because they did not sufficiently plead grounds for rescission or allege actual damages and a material breach for the contract claim.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-02-04
The court granted summary judgment for the defendants, finding that the lease agreement's express terms precluded claims for rescission and unjust enrichment, and that the Florida Consumer Collection Practices Act claims were not supported by the evidence.
-
Del. Ch.·
2021-09-07
The Court of Chancery denied the plaintiff's request for expedited injunctive relief, finding that such relief was unworkable and would require excessive court supervision. Despite assuming a breach of contract and irreparable harm, the court concluded that ordering the defendant
-
S.D. Fla.·
2021-08-18
A surety is entitled to recover its losses under an indemnity agreement when it pays a bonded claim in good faith, regardless of whether liability actually existed, and the indemnitors have not asserted bad faith as a defense.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2021-05-12
A third-party assignee of insurance benefits can recover the actual cash value of the loss even if performance of the repair work becomes impossible due to the sale of the property, as the right to benefits vests at the time of loss.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2020-11-29
The court held that the plaintiff sufficiently pleaded claims for breach of contract and unjust enrichment, denying the defendant university's motion to dismiss.
-
Fla. 4th DCA·
2019-11-13
An unambiguous settlement offer that exceeds insurance limits may support an award of attorneys' fees when the judgment exceeds the offer by more than 25%, and an insurer must pay such fees as required by the insurance contract.
-
Fla. 4th DCA·
2019-11-13
This case involves appeals from an amended final judgment for attorneys' fees. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's decision, finding that the offer of settlement was valid and that the insurer was obligated to pay the attorneys' fees awarded.
-
Del. Ch.·
2014-06-17
The Court recommends denying the respondents' motion to dismiss, finding it reasonably conceivable that the petitioner can establish a valid contract for specific performance of the real estate sale. The essential terms of the contract, including the property description and pric
-
849 F. Supp. 2d 1055·
M.D. Fla.·
2013-12-26
The court denied all pending dispositive motions, finding genuine disputes of material fact and plausible claims that precluded dismissal or summary judgment at this stage.
-
44 So. 3d 645·
Fla. 1st DCA·
2010-09-22
Homebuyers sought to rescind a pre-development condominium sales contract under the Interstate Land Sales Act (ILSA), claiming the seller's two-year completion obligation was illusory due to broad force majeure language. The court affirmed summary judgment for the developer, hold
-
752 F. Supp. 2d 1266·
S.D. Fla.·
2009-02-27
A plaintiff cannot claim rescission of a contract based on a future market crash or a misprediction of market conditions, as the doctrine of mistake applies only to facts existing at the time of contract formation.
-
651 F. Supp. 2d 1320·
S.D. Fla.·
2008-06-30
The court held that the developer was exempt from the Interstate Land Sales Full Disclosure Act's disclosure requirements because the purchase agreement's two-year completion clause, while conditional, was not illusory and tracked HUD guidelines. The court also declined supplemen
-
345 B.R. 765·
M.D. Fla.·
2006-07-21
The court held that the bankruptcy court correctly determined the Amended Agreement was an unenforceable indefinite quantity supply contract and that Anchor's performance was excused due to impossibility after the Lavington Plant was sold.
-
Del. Ch.·
2005-04-01
The court granted defendants' motions to dismiss, finding that Wal-Mart failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted for any of its seven counts. The court determined that express contracts governed the relationships, commercial frustration was inapplicable due to f
-
970 F.2d 289·
7th Cir.·
1992-07-22
The court held that the plaintiff's allegations stated claims upon which relief could be granted, reversing the district court's dismissal.
-
940 F.2d 558·
9th Cir.·
1991-08-09
The court held that GE & T actively participated in and assisted in defrauding and concealing material facts from Mediscan's limited partners, rendering the Amended Agreement and Promissory Note voidable for common law fraud.
-
558 So. 2d 455·
Fla. 4th DCA·
1990-03-07
Reef Buick appeals a jury verdict finding it breached a warranty referral agreement and awarding $329,029 in damages. The appellate court affirms the trial judgment, rejecting Reef Buick's arguments that the contract was ambiguous, unenforceable, or that the jury's damage calcula
-
556 So. 2d 1143·
Fla. 3d DCA·
1989-12-19
The court held that the trial court erred in denying rescission of the contract and failing to determine the disposition of payments made under the contract.
-
851 F.2d 794·
6th Cir.·
1988-07-08
The court held that the surety is liable for the contractor's breach, but the City's damages were not proven with sufficient certainty and attorney fees were properly denied.
-
814 F.2d 529·
8th Cir.·
1987-03-24
The court held that the commercial frustration doctrine was inapplicable because the horse's death was foreseeable and the risk was assumed by the buyer, and that the contract's promotional clause was not triggered by the horse's death.
-
803 F.2d 1358·
5th Cir.·
1986-11-05
The court held that the trial court erred by failing to submit an interrogatory on industry custom for peanut substitution, requiring a remand for factual findings on that issue.
-
799 F.2d 712·
11th Cir.·
1986-09-16
The court held that a client must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the attorney's negligence directly caused the adverse judgment or a greater award of damages, and that the attorney was not negligent in failing to raise defenses not present in the pretrial order giv
-
443 So. 2d 468·
Fla. 2d DCA·
1984-01-11
The court held that the trial court erred in striking the defendant's affirmative defense and granting summary judgment because the defense was legally sufficient and the plaintiff failed to disprove it.