Summary
The Florida First District Court of Appeal held that Florida Roof Masters had standing to pursue a breach of contract claim against Bonnie Page for the unpaid balance of roofing services. The court concluded that the collection agreement did not constitute a full and unconditional assignment of Roof Masters’ contractual rights and reversed the summary judgment on Roof Masters’ breach of contract count, otherwise affirming and remanding.
Holdings
- Roof Masters had standing to bring the breach of contract claim because it retained a direct and articulable stake in the controversy and had not received payment for the allegedly outstanding debt.
- The collection agreement was not a full and unconditional assignment of Roof Masters's interests in the roofing contract; at most, it assigned the chose in action to permit the collection company to sue on Roof Masters's behalf.
Questions Presented
- Whether Roof Masters had standing to bring a breach of contract claim against Page after retaining a collection company to pursue the unpaid debt.
- Whether the collection agreement constituted a full and unconditional assignment of Roof Masters's rights under the roofing contract.
Disposition
reversed_and_remanded
Cases Cited (6)
- Robinson v. Springfield Co., 21 Fla. 203, 217-18 (1885)(applied)
- Spears v. W. Coast Builders’ Supply Co., 133 So. 97, 97 (Fla. 1931)(applied)
- Sammis v. L’Engle, 19 Fla. 800, 804 (1883)(applied)
- Cont’l Cas. Co. v. Ryan Inc. E., 974 So. 2d 368, 376 (Fla. 2008)(applied)
- William F. Hayes, Jr., et al. v. Guardianship of Mae E. Thompson, etc., Hayes v. Guardianship of Thompson, 952 So. 2d 498, 505 (Fla. 2006)(applied)
- Brown v. Firestone, 382 So. 2d 654, 662 (Fla. 1980)(applied)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…