FINST DEV., INC., APPELLANT,
v.
ISAAC BEMAOR, SERGIO GOLDEMBERG, DAVID SAUL, VULF MINTZ, LUBA MINTZ AND ZELMAN MINTZ, APPELLEES
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Florida Condominium Act cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This is an appeal from a final summary judgment rescinding certain contracts for the sale of condominium units, returning the deposits thereon to the plaintiff/buyers, and awarding attorney’s fees for the plaintiff/buyers. The material facts of this case, although complex, are undisputed on this record. We conclude that based on these facts the contracts herein were properly rescinded as a matter of law for failure of the defendant/seller to comply substantially with certain provisions of the Florida Condominium Act, §§ 718.202, 718.-503, 718.504, Fla.Stat. (1981), and the Federal Interstate Land Sales Full Disclosure Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1701 et seq. (1982); see Dorchester Development, Inc. v. Burk, 439 So. 2d 1032 (Fla.3d DCA 1983). We also agree that as a matter of law the counterclaim herein has no merit based on this record. Finally, we conclude that the attorney’s fees awarded below were reasonable and authorized by Section 718.-506(2), Florida Statutes (1981). See Pfohl v. Pfohl, 345 So. 2d 371, 379 (Fla.3d DCA 1977). We accordingly affirm in all respects the final summary judgment under review.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Finst Dev., Inc. v. Bemaor, 449 So. 2d 290 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)
-
Grove Towers, Inc. v. Lopez, 467 So. 2d 358 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985)…he City of Miami was later dismissed from the suit. . This court, following the lead of other courts, e.g., Nargiz v. Henlopen Developers, 380 A. 2d 1361 (Del.1977), has applied ILSA to sales of condominium units. Finst Development, Inc. v. Bemaor, 449 So. 2d 292 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984); Orpheus Investments v. Ryegon Investments, Inc., 447 So. 2d 257 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); Dorchester Development, Inc. v. Burk, 439 So. 2d 1032 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983). Contra Winter v. Hollingsworth Properties, Inc., 587 F.Supp. 1289 (S.D.…
-
Hamptons Dev. Corp. OF Dade v. Sackler, 522 So. 2d 1035 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988)…1444 (11th Cir.1985); Sckatz v. Jockey Club Phase III, Ltd., 604 F.Supp. 537 (S.D. Fla.1985); Appalachian, Inc. v. Olson, 468 So. 2d 266 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985); Grove Towers, Inc. v. Lopez, 467 So. 2d 358 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985); Finst Dev., Inc. v. Bemaor, 449 So. 2d 292 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984); Orpheus Investments v. Ryegon Investments, 447 So. 2d 257 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); Dorchester Development, Inc. v. Burk, 439 So. 2d 1032 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); but see Note, Beyond Consumer Protection: The Applicability of the Interstate…
Authorities Cited
- Pfohl v. Pfohl, 345 So. 2d 371 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977)
- Dorchester Dev., Inc. v. Tema Burk, 439 So. 2d 1032 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)
- Finst Dev., Inc. v. Bemaor, 449 So. 2d 290 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)