VANDERBILT TOWERS, UNIT ONE OF NAPLES, INC., A NONPROFIT CORPORATION, APPELLANT,
v.
SUMMIT PROPERTIES, AN OHIO TRUST, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Ambiguity In Contract Language cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This case involved complicated factual and legal issues which need not be outlined here. Upon review of the record and briefs and after hearing oral argument, we have concluded that the trial court correctly ruled that the lease agreement was sufficiently ambiguous to permit the introduction of parol evidence to aid in its interpretation. Furthermore, the evidence supports the court’s conclusion that paragraph 22(c) should not be read to limit the application of both paragraphs 22(a) and 22(b) to those occasions in which there has been a substantial change in use or improvements on the land. However, there was no basis for the court to strike paragraph 22(c) in its entirety. Accordingly, paragraph 22(c) is modified to read as follows:
(c) The amount of the rentals due as determined by the alternate provision as set forth in paragraph 22(b) shall only be used if and in the event of a substantial change in use or improvements on the land.
The lease agreement as modified comports with reason and common sense and more nearly reflects the intentions of the parties at the time the lease was entered into.
Otherwise, the final judgment is AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED.
GRIMES, C. J., and BOARDMAN and RYDER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (13 total)
-
Indian River Farms v. YBF P'rs, 777 So. 2d 1096 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001)…of redemption is an incident of all mortgages and cannot be extinguished except by due process of law; and that the right belongs to the mortgagor and those claiming under or through him.” John Stepp, Inc. v. First Fed. Sav. and Loan Ass’n of Miami, 379 So. 2d 384, 385 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980). The right of redemption continues to exist until the foreclosure sale has been confirmed by the court, or if no objection, then until the issuance of the certificate of title. See id. Section 45.0315 empowers a court to fi…
-
Ahmad Saidi v. Wasko, 687 So. 2d 10 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996)…the mortgagor’s estate upon the filing of the certificate of title, appear to refer to the right of redemption. A mortgagor’s equity of redemption is considered to be an estate in land. John Stepp v. First Federal Savings and Loan Ass’n. of Miami, 379 So. 2d 384 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980); Hoffman v. Semet, 316 So. 2d 649 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975). To “foreclose” is defined as “to shut out, to bar, to terminate. Method of terminating mortgagor’s right of redemption.” Blacks Law Dictionary 581 (5th ed. 1979). Giving the…
-
Sudhoff v. Fed. Nat'l Mortg. Ass'n, 942 So. 2d 425 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006)…So. 2d 1096, 1099 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001). This equity of redemption is an estate in land. Deluxe Motel, Inc., 770 So. 2d at 284; Saidi, 687 So. 2d at 12; Indian River Farms, 777 So. 2d at 1099; John Stepp, Inc. v. First Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass’n of Miami 379 So. 2d 384, 386 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980). “[T]he right of redemption is an incident of all mortgages and cannot be extinguished except by due process of law.” See Indian River Farms, 777 So. 2d at 1099; John Stepp, Inc., 379 So. 2d at 386; see also VOSR Indus., Inc…
Previewing 3 of 13 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence