IRVING BALTO D/B/A FLORIDA BOOKKEEPING SERVICE, APPELLANT,
v.
ROBERT MALEY, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Plain Language Rule cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The issue in this appeal is whether the contract between the parties was so ambiguous as to require interpretation by the trial court. We think it was not, and reverse, with instructions.
We have reviewed the agreement and addendum between the parties and find no meaningful conflicts or ambiguities. With regard to Maley’s contention that the pro-rata replacement clause means Balto was merely entitled to a credit for clients no longer with the business, we think that interpretation is not supported by the plain language of the agreement. While that provision, and others relating to contingent reductions in the purchase price, impose harsh consequences on the seller due to an unexpected large-scale departure by the clients, it is not the duty of this court to relieve a party from the hardship of an improvident bargain. Simpson v. Young, 369 So. 2d 376 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979).
Consequently, we reverse and remand this cause, with instructions that the trial court determine the revised purchase price, based upon a reduction equal to the annual billing of each client that departed during the first year, and award the proper sum to the appropriate party.
DOWNEY, LETTS and HURLEY, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Singer Island Civic Ass'n, Inc. v. Casetta, Ltd., 527 So. 2d 861 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988)…Ct. 880, 3 L.Ed.2d 832 (1959). Even if the court is of the view that enforcement of the contract imposes an unfair burden on one of the parties, this alone does not provide a sufficient basis to vary the clear terms agreed upon. Cf. Balto v. Maley, 464 So. 2d 579 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985); Chalfonte Development Corp. v. Rosewin Coats, Inc., 374 So. 2d 618 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979). See also Giehler v. Ward, 77 So. 2d 452 (Fla.1955). [*863] The fact that enforcement of an agreement results in a heavier burden, than would…
-
Fla. Atl. Marine, Inc. v. Seminole Boatyard, Inc., 630 So. 2d 219 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993)…erms of the parties’ agreement by superimposing a separate agreement of unknown terms and unsupported by the record. See Rybovich Boat Works, Inc. v. Atkins, 587 So. 2d 519 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991), rev. denied, 599 So. 2d 654 (Fla.1992); Balto v. Matey, 464 So. 2d 579 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985); Simpson v. Young, 369 So. 2d 376 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979). While the landlord did assert that the audit requirement was ambiguously worded and waived by the tenant’s conduct, neither of these arguments were accepted by the trial cou…
Authorities Cited
- Simpson v. Young, 369 So. 2d 376 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979)