FRANK A. LOVE AND CHRISTINA G. LOVE, APPELLANTS,
v.
GENERAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, APPELLEE

Fla. 3d DCA | 1989-11-21
No. 88-2191
Before BASKIN, FERGUSON and COPE, JJ.
555 So. 2d 397 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1989) Positive Treatment
Cited by 16 cases

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.


Holding

The court held that the trial court abused its discretion in vacating the class certification order because the claims, though arising from individual contracts, presented a common question of law and fact based on identical contractual clauses.


Headnotes

[1] A class action is appropriate when the subject of the action presents a question of common or general interest, and all members of the class have a similar interest in ob…

[2] Claims arising from different factual contexts may be pled as a class action if they share a common or general interest in the object, result, or question involved in the…

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

Facts & Procedural History

Homeowners filed a class action against General Development Corporation (GDC) for breach of installment sales contracts, alleging GDC failed to comple…

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.


Opinion of the Court
BASKIN, Judge.

BASKIN, Judge.

The owners of individual homesites in various planned General Development Corporation [GDC]-residential communities appeal a trial court order vacating an earlier order certifying them as a class in an action they filed against GDC. We reverse.

Appellants filed a class action against GDC pursuant to Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.220 for declaratory relief and to recover damages resulting from its breaches of the installment sales contracts gov erning their homesites. Appellants complained that GDC breached its contracts by failing to complete roads leading to the homesites within the time provided by clauses two 1 and nine2 of each of their installment sales contracts. The trial judge determined the class, but then re-cused himself from the case for reasons unrelated to this appeal. GDC petitioned the successor trial judge to reconsider the order determining the class; the successor judge vacated the order.3

Appellants assert that, in their complaint, they and other members of the class present a question of common interest. In response, GDC argues that the claims are not common to members of the class but are instead aggregated individual claims based on individual contracts. It points out that it has separate and distinct reasons for failing to comply with the contract provisions, and that these facts render class treatment inappropriate.

Although claims may arise from different factual contexts, they may be pled as a class action if the subject of the action presents a question of common or general interest, and where all members of the class have a similar interest in obtaining the relief sought. The common or general interest must be in the object of the action, in the result sought to be accomplished in the proceedings, or in the question involved in the action. There must be a common right of recovery based on the same essential facts.

Port Royal, Inc. v. Conboy, 154 So. 2d 734, 737 (Fla. 2d DCA 1963), cited with approval in Harrell v. Hess Oil & Chem. Corp., 287 So. 2d 291 (Fla.1973); see Frankel v. City of Miami Beach, 340 So. 2d 463 (Fla.1976); Allen v. Avondale Co., 135 Fla. 6, 185 So. 137 (1938); Powell v. River Ranch Property Owners Ass’n, Inc., 522 So. 2d 69, 70 (Fla. 2d DCA), review denied, 531 So. 2d 1354 (Fla.1988); Imperial Towers Condominium, Inc. v. Brown, 338 So. 2d 1081 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976), appeal dismissed, 354 So. 2d 978 (Fla.1977); Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.220; but see K.D. Lewis Enter. Corp., Inc. v. Smith, 445 So. 2d 1032 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984).

Here, appellants are suing to recover for breaches of identical clauses in their purchase agreements. Although other clauses in the contracts may not be common to all contracts and the reasons for GDC’s delays in providing roads may vary, class certification is appropriate because each claim is based on the same essential facts and each complainant seeks enforcement of the contractual remedy. We therefore hold that the trial court abused its discretion in refusing to certify the class. We reverse the order vacating the order determining the class and remand for reinstatement of the class action without prejudice to the creation of subclasses, if appropriate. See Imperial Towers, 338 So. 2d at 1084.

Reversed and remanded with directions.

. In all of the subject contracts, clause two provides:

2.STREETS.

This property is currently undeveloped. We agree to complete hard surface all weather streets adjacent to your property before the end of the development year stated on the front of this contract.

Some of the contracts contain the following additional language:

However, installation of improvements could be delayed by weather conditions, labor conditions, delays in issuance of governmental permits or other events beyond our control.

. Clause nine provides:

9. YOUR RIGHTS IF WE FAIL TO PERFORM

If we fail to meet any of our obligations under this Contract you may elect either of the following exclusive remedies at your option and upon notification to you and opportunity to elect one of these remedies, we will be released from any further obligations under this Contract.

(a) You may exchange this property for other available property of similar value in this or any other of our communities in a similarly desirable location, or (b) We will refund all payments made by you under this Contract.

There are no other privileges of cancellation or refund except as stated above.

.The court acted without furnishing notice to members of the class or conducting a hearing.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Broin v. Philip Morris Cos., Inc., 641 So. 2d 888 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994)
    …ise to the remaining claims and ... based on the same legal theory.” Powell, 522 So. 2d at 70. Claims that arise from different factual contexts may be pled as a class action if they present a question of common interest. Love v. General Dev. Corp., 555 So. 2d 397, 398 [*891] (Fla. 3d DCA 1989). The complaint satisfies this prerequisite. It is of no moment, as defendants claim, that different statutes of limitation may apply, or that different choice of law provisions may govern. Differences among the class…
  • Conley v. Morley Realty Corp., 575 So. 2d 253 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991)
    …1, Fla.Stat. (1989). In sum, plaintiff seeks a construction of a liquidated damages provision common to all of seller’s standard form contracts, and in the circumstances, class action treatment is appropriate. See Love v. General Development Corp., 555 So. 2d 397 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989). The class definition contained in the amended complaint, as well as that contained in the original complaint, should not have been dismissed. On remand, plaintiff may amend the class definition. For the foregoing reasons, the or…
  • Sears v. Labora, 670 So. 2d 1025 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996)
    …2d 888 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994), rev. denied, 654 So. 2d 919 (Fla.1995). We have carefully reviewed the record and find no abuse of discretion in the trial court’s application of these criteria to grant class certification. See Love v. General Dev. Corp., 555 So. 2d 397 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989). Accordingly, we affirm the order granting class certification except to the extent that it identifies the class as including “all persons and business entities.” In accordance with this Court’s recent opinion in R.J. Reynolds T…

Previewing 3 of 9 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw