JEANETTE TAVORMINA, TRUSTEE FOR G & SONS CONSTRUCTION, INC., APPELLANT,
v.
DADE COUNTY, A POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA, 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 a genuine issue of material fact exists regarding the exclusivity of the contract and whether a breach occurred.
Appellant contracted with Dade County for landfill overburden services. Appellant claims the contract was exclusive and breached, while the County arg…
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 Genuine Issue Of Material Fact cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
We reverse a summary judgment and hold that there exists a genuine issue of material fact. Holl v. Talcott, 191 So. 2d 40 (Fla.1966).
Appellant first contends that it entered into an exclusive services contract with Dade County wherein it agreed to provide all the county’s landfill “overburden” on an “as needed” basis. Appellee, Dade County, responds that the agreement with appellant was not exclusive in nature but contemplated multiple awards to other contractors from whom the county could utilize the best bid. We find that appellee failed to prove as nonexistent a genuine trial issue, i.e., whether the county had awarded a similar landfill contract to any other supplier pursuant to the same Invitation to Bid. A determination as to whether the contract was exclusive in nature is contingent upon resolution of that issue.
Appellee further argues that even if the “overburden agreement” between appellant and appellee was exclusive, no breach occurred because the fill received from other sources was gratuitous. Appellant counters that the county’s payment to another firm for hauling donated fill from a site not owned by the county to the county-owned main landfill site constituted a breach because the agreement contemplated both the fill and the hauling. The agreement does cover hauling. Whether there is a breach thus also pivots on a resolution of the first question, i.e., did the agreement constitute an exclusive services contract.
Reversed and remanded for further proceedings.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Jeanette Tavormina for G & Sons Constr., Inc. v. Dade Cnty., 508 So. 2d 1293 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987)…PER CURIAM. Following our opinion and decision reported in Tavormina v. Dade County, 475 So. 2d 1304 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985) the matter reoccurred in the trial court. Both parties moved for summary judgment and the trial court again awarded summary judgment in favor of the county. The summary judgment reads in part as follows: “... This Court has pr…1 / 2
Authorities Cited
- Gory Roofing Tile Mfg., Inc. v. Davison, 191 So. 2d 40 (Fla. 1966)