DAVID J. DEEN, LEONIE G. DEEN, AND D.J. DEEN-STEINBERG, INC., APPELLANTS,
v.
ZAREMBA FLORIDA CO., AND SENTINEL HOMES, INC., D/B/A FLORIDA COMMUNITIES, 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.
Florida appellate court affirmed rescission of condominium purchase contract under section 718.506 but reversed denial of attorney's fees and advertising expense reimbursement due to lack of substantial competent evidence.
A condominium purchase contract may be rescinded under section 718.506, Florida Statutes, and the prevailing party is entitled to attorney's fees and reimbursement for authorized advertising expenses when substantial competent evidence supports such claims.
[1] Section 718.506, Florida Statutes, provides for rescission of condominium purchase contracts and mandates an award of attorney's fees to the prevailing party.
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePlaintiffs contracted to purchase a condominium from defendants and sought rescission under section 718.506, along with attorney's fees and reimbursem…
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 Statutory Remedies cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
We affirm the final judgment of the trial court which ordered, pursuant to section 718.506, Florida Statutes (1985), rescission of plaintiffs’ contract to purchase a condominium from defendant. In addition, because the statutory remedy granted provides for an award of attorney’s fees to the prevailing party, § 718.506(2), Fla.Stat. (1985), we reverse that portion of the final judgment denying plaintiffs’ claim for attorney’s fees under section 718.506(2). Finally, because the record does not contain substantial competent evidence to support the trial court’s finding that defendant never authorized an advertising program, we reverse that portion of the final judgment denying plaintiffs’ claim for reimbursement for advertising expenses. See Commercial Bank of Kendall v. Costley, 324 So. 2d 182, 183 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975) (where substantial competent evidence to support a trial judge’s findings of fact is lacking, appellate court’s duty is to reverse).
The remaining points raised on appeal and cross-appeal have been considered and found to be without merit. Accordingly, this cause is remanded to the trial court to determine and award attorney’s fees and advertising expenses, consistent with this opinion.
Affirmed in part, reversed in part and remanded with directions.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
McGRIFF v. State, 528 So. 2d 396 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988)…nd the sentence was increased to thirty years. The defendant appealed; this court affirmed the convictions but vacated the sentences finding that the trial court failed to comply with the procedures established in section 775.-084. McGriff v. State, 497 So. 2d 1296 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986), review denied, 506 So. 2d 1042 (Fla.1987). After conducting the proper investigation and hearing, the trial court once again found the defendant to be an habitual offender and resentenced him to thirty years. The defendant appeal…
-
Rangel Hernandez v. State, 547 So. 2d 138 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988)…ective Fleming. Given the vague nature of this testimony and the other evidence of guilt in this ease, we are unwilling to upset this conviction on this and other technical errors complained of in Detective Fleming’s testimony. See McGriff v. State, 497 So. 2d 1296, 1298 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986), rev. denied, 506 So. 2d 1042 (Fla.1987); Allen v. State, 474 So. 2d 261 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985), rev. denied, 484 So. 2d 7 (Fla.1986); Barnes v. State, 470 So. 2d 851 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985); Holmes v. Wainwright, 389 So. 2d 1233 (…
-
Nacius Julian v. State, 545 So. 2d 347 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989)…conviction for possession of the amount charged under Count I.4 Appellant also contends that hearsay testimony was improperly admitted at trial. The error, if any, was harmless. Graham v. State, 479 So. 2d 824 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985), McGriff v. State, 497 So. 2d 1296 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986), review denied, 506 So. 2d 1042 (Fla.1987). Our review of the record reveals that the objectionable testimony was, with one exception, cumulative to properly-admitted evidence. The instance involving noncumulative testimony was cu…
Previewing 3 of 8 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Commercial Bank OF Kendall v. Costley, 324 So. 2d 182 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975)