PONNUSWAMY NATARAJAN, APPELLANT,
v.
PARIS HORN, 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.
The court held that the contract's attorney's fees clause did not apply to an action seeking rescission or reformation of the contract. The court affirmed the directed verdict but reversed the award of attorney's fees.
[1] A directed verdict is affirmed when the appealing party raises no meritorious substantive issues.
[2] A party is not entitled to attorney's fees under a contract clause requiring payment for expenses incurred due to another party's failure to comply with the contract's te…
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePlaintiff sued to reform or rescind a real estate contract. The trial court granted a directed verdict for the defendant and awarded attorney's fees b…
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 Reformation Of Contract cases and more on FLexlaw
BOARDMAN, Acting Chief Judge.
Ponnuswamy Natarajan, plaintiff below, appeals a final judgment granting a directed verdict in favor of appellee/defendant Paris Horn in appellant’s action seeking reformation or rescission of an executed contract between the parties whereby appellee sold appellant a parcel of real estate and the residential structure thereon. Appellant also challenges the trial court’s award of attorney’s fees to appellee. Finding no merit to the substantive issues raised by appellant, we affirm the directed verdict, but we reverse the award of attorney’s fees.
Appellee made her request for fees on the basis of section 57.105, Florida Statutes (1979), which mandates the award of attorney’s fees to the prevailing party if the court finds a complete absence of a justiciable issue of either of law or fact raised by the losing party.
The trial court found, and properly so, that an award of attorney’s fees pursuant to this statute was not justified under the facts and circumstances of this case.
However, the trial court nevertheless awarded fees as requested, predicating its decision on certain language in the contract between the parties. This, we hold, was error. The only clause in the contract that concerns legal fees provides: “Any party failing to comply with the terms of this contract will pay all expenses, including a reasonable Attorney’s fee, incurred by the other party to this contract as a result of such failure.” Appellee is not entitled to fees under this clause. There is no contention that appellant failed to comply with any term of the contract.
Moreover, this action was not brought to enforce the contract or any provision thereof, but rather to rescind or reform the contract.
Thus this action is completely outside the terms of the contract.
Accordingly, the portion of the final judgment awarding appellant nothing on his claim against appellee is affirmed, but the award of attorney’s fees to appellee is stricken.
GRIMES and RYDER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Household Fin. Corp., III v. Williams, 290 So. 3d 508 (Fla. 4th DCA 2020)
-
Deutsche Bank v. Quintela, 268 So. 3d 156 (Fla. 4th DCA 2019)…uired to take any action to enforce the contract, the court may also allow reasonable attorney’s fees to the other party when that party prevails in any action, whether as plaintiff or defendant, with respect to the contract.” In Natarajan v. Horn, 402 So. 2d 596, 596 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981), Natarajan sought reformation of a contract he entered into with Horn. The trial court granted a directed verdict in favor of Horn and awarded him prevailing party attorneys’ fees based on a provision in the contract. Id.…