SHERMAN H. FRIEDMAN AND MARTHA G. FRIEDMAN, HIS WIFE, APPELLANTS,
v.
U.S. HOME CORPORATION, CLEARWATER CONCRETE INDUSTRIES, INC., AND ROBERT FERTIG, APPELLEES
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 Friedmans purchased a new home with a defective concrete floor slab that failed to meet building code requirements. They rejected the builder's repair proposal and sued for damages based on breach of warranty and negligence, but the trial court found the proposed repairs were a reasonable exercise of the builder's warranty option, and the appellate court affirmed.
The trial court's judgment in favor of appellees was affirmed because the Friedmans failed to prove that the defendants' proposed repairs were unreasonable. The trial court found that both plaintiffs' and defendants' expert witnesses were equally credible, with plaintiffs' experts favoring total replacement and defendants' experts believing the proposed repairs would be effective.
[1] A trial court's findings and conclusions are presumed correct and will not be disturbed on appeal if supported by competent, substantial evidence.
[2] A warranty provision allowing a warrantor to repair or replace a defective component at its option is reasonably exercised when the warrantor proposes repairs that its ex…
Previewing 2 of 3 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“Pursuant to the homeowners warranty, U.S. Home agreed to either repair or replace at its option and at no charge to the original purchaser any defective component.”
Establishes the nature of U.S. Home's warranty obligation and its discretion in choosing the remedy
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe Friedmans agreed to purchase a new home from U.S. Home Corporation, with Robert Fertig as the licensed contractor and Clearwater Concrete Industri…
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 Presumption Of Correctness Of Judgment cases and more on FLexlaw
OTT, Chief Judge.
In this action for damages based on breach of a new home warranty and negligence, the Friedmans appeal from a final judgment in appellees’ favor. We affirm.
The Friedmans agreed to purchase a lot and a new home from U.S. Home Corporation. Robert Fertig was the licensed contractor on the job, and Clearwater Concrete Industries, Inc., furnished the concrete for the floor slab in the new home. The compressive strength of the concrete slab is approximately 1600 pounds per square inch. Appellees admit that the applicable building code requires 2500 pounds per square inch and that the concrete slab therefore constitutes a defective component.
U.S. Home warranted the home to the original purchasers against defects in material and workmanship for one year from the closing date. Pursuant to the homeowners warranty, U.S. Home agreed to either repair or replace at its option and at no charge to the original purchaser any defective component.
In accordance with its warranty, U.S. Home proposed to repair the defective slab by covering it with a surface hardener, by shallow trenching and filling with mortar around the perimeters of the floors, and by replacing the slab in the garage. The proposal also involved rewarranting the house against structural deficiencies caused by the weak slab. The Friedmans doubted the effectiveness of the proposed repairs, rejected the offer, and filed the instant suit for damages.
Following trial, the lower court entered a final judgment in appellees’ favor. Therein, the trial court found that the only issue was whether to repair or replace the concrete slab, that plaintiffs’ experts believed that only total replacement of the concrete slab would cure the identified problems, that defendants’ experts believed that the repair program proposed by appellees would effectively cure the problems, that all expert witnesses were equally credible, and that therefore plaintiffs had failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that defendants’ proposed repairs were not a reasonable exercise of their option under the homeowners warranty.
The final judgment of the trial court comes to this court clothed with a presumption of correctness. See Walker v. Narose Buildings, Inc., 206 So. 2d 400 (Fla. 2d DCA), cert. denied, 212 So. 2d 871 (Fla.1968). The lower court’s findings and con- elusions will not be disturbed where there is competent, substantial evidence to support such findings and conclusions. In re Estate of Rodgers, 149 So. 2d 391 (Fla. 1st DCA 1963).
Based on our review of the record, we find competent, substantial evidence to support the final judgment rendered by the trial court.
Parenthetically, we note that appellees’ attorney affirmatively represented to this court that U.S. Home will repair and rewar-rant the defective floor slab in accordance with its warranty and pretrial offer. AFFIRMED.
GRIMES, A.C.J., and SCHOONOVER, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Plaza Builders, Inc. v. Regis, 502 So. 2d 918 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986)…ent comes to this court clothed with a presumption of correctness. The lower court’s findings and conclusions will not be disturbed where there is competent, substantial evidence to support such findings and conclusions. Friedman v. U.S. Home Corp., 452 So. 2d 1111 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984); Withers v. Flagship Peoples Bank of Tallahassee, 473 So. 2d 789 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985). The setoff was based upon competent, substantial evi [*922] dence. Both sides presented testimonial and documentary evidence in support of their…
-
Gergora v. Flynn, 486 So. 2d 5 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986)…eaches justified rescission. E.M.R. further asserts that the Flynns waived any default by continuing to accept rent. We disagree. The trial court’s judgment comes to this court clothed with a presumption of correctness, Friedman v. U.S. Home Corp., 452 So. 2d 1111 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984); Taylor Creek Village Association v. Houghton, 349 So. 2d 1219 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977), and will not be disturbed on appeal absent a showing that the findings are clearly erroneous or constitute an abuse of discretion. Manufacturers Na…
-
In re the Adoption OF A.C.R. & C.W.R, 467 So. 2d 434 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985)…nolds, holding that the adoption agreement entered into between the parties was valid. Contrary to appellant’s contentions, we find that there was sufficient competent evidence to support the findings of the trial court. Friedman v. U.S. Home Corp., 452 So. 2d 1111 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984); In re Estate of Rodgers, 149 So. 2d 391 (Fla. 1st DCA 1963). Accordingly, we affirm. RYDER, C.J., and CAMPBELL and FRANK, JJ., concur.…
Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- In re Est. of Harold E. Rodgers, 149 So. 2d 391 (Fla. 1st DCA 1963)
- Sol Walker v. Narose BLDGS., Inc., 206 So. 2d 400 (Fla. 2d DCA 1968)
- The Protestant Episcopal Church OF the Diocese OF Fla. v. The Tallahassee Bank & Tr. Co., 206 So. 2d 400 (Fla. 1st DCA 1968)
- United Nat'l Bank v. Dexheimer, 212 So. 2d 871 (Fla. 1968)
- Siegel v. Solomon, 212 So. 2d 871 (Fla. 1968)