NELSON RICARDO DIAZ AND AGUEDA PEREZ DIAZ
v.
IGNACIO NAVAJAS
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 appellate court affirmed a lower court's order for specific performance of a real estate contract. The sellers attempted to back out of the sale due to remorse, but the court found the buyer was ready, willing, and able to close.
No, the lower court did not err. The buyer was ready, willing, and able to close on the sale, and the sellers' attempt to withdraw was not supported by any persuasive legal or factual basis.
[1] A buyer is entitled to specific performance of a real estate contract when the buyer demonstrates they were ready, willing, and able to close the transaction.
[2] A party's remorse or desire to withdraw from a contract, without a legal or factual basis, does not excuse performance.
Previewing 2 of 4 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“the buyer was “ready, willing, and able to close” under the terms of the agreement, as amended, and, the sellers, motivated solely by manifestations of sellers’ remorse, attempted to extricate themselves from the negotiated terms of the sale, without any persuasive legal or factual basis.”
This quote summarizes the court's finding regarding the buyer's readiness and the sellers' unsupported attempt to withdraw.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe sellers, Nelson Ricardo Diaz and Agueda Perez Diaz, appealed an order granting specific performance of a contract for the sale of vacant land to t…
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 Equitable Cognizance cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellants, Nelson Ricardo Diaz and Agueda Perez Diaz, challenge an order granting specific performance of a contract for the sale of a parcel of vacant land to appellee, Ignacio Navajas.
The record amply supports the conclusion rendered by the lower tribunal that the buyer was “ready, willing, and able to close” under the terms of the agreement, as amended, and, the sellers, motivated solely by manifestations of sellers’ remorse, attempted to extricate themselves from the negotiated terms of the sale, without any persuasive legal or factual basis. Mirzataheri v. FM E. Developers, LLC, 193 So. 3d 19, 22 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016) (finding specific performance was appropriate as buyer was “ready, willing, and able to close” and the contract “provide[d] for specific performance”); see Smith v. Crissey, 478 So. 2d 1181, 1182 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985) (“To obtain specific performance, it is unnecessary to physically tender the purchase price so long as the purchaser establishes that he was ready, willing and able to do so or that he has been excused from so doing.”) (citation omitted).
Accordingly, we find no abuse of discretion and affirm the decree under review. See Muniz v. Crystal Lake Project, LLC, 947 So. 2d 464, 469 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006) (“The decision whether to grant or withhold a judgment for specific performance is a matter within the sound discretion of the trial court which will not be disturbed on appeal unless clearly erroneous.”) (citation omitted); see also Invego Auto Parts, Inc. v. Rodriguez, 34 So. 3d 103, 105 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010) (“In light of the overwhelming evidence that [appellant] was ready, willing, and able to perform, the trial court erred in not awarding specific performance.”); Hogan v. Norfleet, 113 So. 2d 437, 439 (Fla. 2d DCA 1959) (“Our Florida courts have held that specific performance of a contract is a matter of equitable cognizance as applied both to real and personal property, and where, in the case of personal property, it is of peculiar character and value, specific performance will be granted.”) (citation omitted).
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Dixie Pines Land & Nursery, LLC v. Madison Dev. Grp. LLC (Fla. 3d DCA 2024)
Authorities Cited
- Dania MUÑIZ and Arturo A. Chao v. Crystal Lake Project, LLC, 947 So. 2d 464 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006)
- Invego Auto Parts, Inc. v. Rodriguez, 34 So. 3d 103 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010)
- McDONALD v. Great Atl. & Pac. TEA Co., 113 So. 2d 437 (Fla. 3d DCA 1959)
- Smith v. Crissey, 478 So. 2d 1181 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985)
- Ali A. Mirzataheri v. FM E. Developers, LLC, 193 So. 3d 19 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016)