TED DOBBS, APPELLANT,
v.
JULES GORLITZ, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Oral Contract cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Where uneontroverted affidavits and deposition testimony submitted in support of a summary judgment motion showed that the defendant, a business owner, had in 1981 renewed an earlier oral promise to plaintiff, his employee, to give plaintiff ownership in the business upon defendant’s retirement in exchange for the plaintiff remaining in his employ, and that within the year defendant retired from the business and sold all his stock in the business to a third party, defendant had not demonstrated conclusively that plaintiff’s cause of action for breach of contract was barred by the statute of frauds. Summary judgment was, therefore, inappropriate. There was nothing in the terms of the oral agreement to show that it could not be performed within a year. Further, the fact that the defendant did sell his business interest within a year of the agreement is a strong factor weighing against construction of the agreement as one within the statute of frauds. See Yates v. Ball, 132 Fla. 132, 181 So. 341 (1937); Central National Bank of Miami v. Central Bancorp, Inc., 411 So. 2d 358 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982).
Reversed and remanded for further proceedings.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Goslin v. Racal Data Commc'ns, Inc., 468 So. 2d 390 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985)…g to its terms took the substitute agreement out of the statute of frauds, notwithstanding that the agreement was not, at its inception, to be performed within the year. Hiatt v. Vaughn, 430 So. 2d 597 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983); see also Dobbs v. Gorlitz, 443 So. 2d 1068 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984) (fact that oral promise was performed within the year precluded summary judgment on statute of frauds ground). By cross-appeal, Racal-Milgo complains that the trial court abused its discretion in denying its motion to tax costs o…
-
LaRUE v. Kalex Constr. & Dev., Inc., 97 So. 3d 251 (Fla. 3d DCA 2012)…1965))). Full performance of an oral agreement, however, may remove the agreement from the statute of frauds if the agreement is capable of being performed within a year and was, in fact, performed within one year. For example, in Dobbs v. Gorlitz, 443 So. 2d 1068,1068 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984), this Court reversed the trial court’s order granting summary judgment in favor of Gorlitz, Dobbs’ employer, after this Court concluded that there were material disputed issues as to whether the alleged oral employment agreem…
-
Rohrback v. Maxwell Dauer, 469 So. 2d 833 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985)…tion of the statute of frauds); United of Omaha Life Insurance Co. v. Nob Hill Associates, 450 So. 2d 536 (Fla. 3d DCA), review denied, 458 So. 2d 274 (Fla.1984) (party may be es-topped from raising statute of frauds as a defense); Dobbs v. Gorlitz, 443 So. 2d 1068 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984) (issue of fact on question of whether oral promise was to be performed within a year precludes summary judgment); and (e) whether there was consideration for the assignment of Rohr-baek’s right, title and interest in the partnersh…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Yates v. Ball, 132 Fla. 132 (Fla. 1937)
- Cent. Nat'l Bank OF Miami v. Cent. Bancorp., Inc., 411 So. 2d 358 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982)