Summary
The Florida Third District Court of Appeal affirmed a final judgment for the Estevez defendants in a dispute concerning the proposed sale of four properties. The court held that the record did not establish an enforceable agreement sufficiently definite and complete to support specific performance or breach-of-contract relief, citing Florida's statute of frauds and related contract principles.
Holdings
- A court may grant specific performance only when the parties entered into an agreement that is definite, certain, and complete in all essential terms; the judgment rejecting Sandalwood's specific-performance claim was affirmed.
- The final judgment rejecting Sandalwood's breach-of-contract claim was affirmed because Sandalwood did not establish a binding, enforceable agreement covering the sale of all four properties.
Questions Presented
- Whether Sandalwood established an enforceable contract for the purchase and sale of all four properties sufficient to support specific performance.
- Whether Sandalwood was entitled to recover for breach of contract based on the alleged agreement.
Disposition
affirmed
Cases Cited (5)
- Muniz v. Crystal Lake Project, LLC, 947 So. 2d 464, 469 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006)(followed)
- Greater N.Y. Corp. v. Cenvill Miami Beach Corp., 620 So. 2d 1068, 1070 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993)(followed)
- Truly Nolen, Inc. v. Atlas Moving & Storage Warehouses, Inc., 125 So. 2d 903, 905 (Fla. 3d DCA 1961)(followed)
- Gonzalez v. Barrenechea, 170 So. 3d 13, 16 (Fla. 3d DCA 2015)(followed)
- Regions Bank v. Maroone Chevrolet, L.L.C., 118 So. 3d 251, 257 (Fla. 2013)(followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…