THOMAS O'DONNELL AND FRAZER OIL AND GAS COMPANY, APPELLANTS,
v.
ARCOIRIES, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, ET AL., 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.
The court held that treble damages for civil theft are recoverable even if a contract dispute exists, as the loss resulted from theft separate from the contract. The court also affirmed the trial court's computation of treble damages including prejudgment interest.
Appellants allegedly fraudulently obtained and diverted appellee's funds intended for a partnership purchase of oil leases. The jury returned a verdic…
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 Embezzlement cases and more on FLexlaw
STONE, Judge.
This is an appeal from a judgment following a jury verdict for plaintiff on separate counts for civil theft, fraud and breach of fiduciary duty. Evidence showed the appellants fraudulently obtained and di verted appellee’s funds intended for use in a partnership purchase of oil leases. We affirm.
The appellants argue this was essentially a partnership claim and the plaintiff had no standing. However, the evidence supports a conclusion that Arcoiries, Inc. was permanently deprived of its funds by willful misrepresentations furthering a misappropriation by appellants for their own use.
Appellant also asserts that treble damages for civil theft are not recoverable in a contract dispute. See Futch v. Head, 511 So. 2d 314 (Fla. 1st DCA), rev. denied, 518 So. 2d 1275 (Fla.1987); Rosen v. Marlin, 486 So. 2d 623 (Fla. 3d DCA), rev. denied, 494 So. 2d 1151 (Fla.1986). However, the verdict in this case was on a tort claim. The loss was found to result from a theft, separate and distinct from any contractual dispute. Little distinguishes this case from others recognizing a right to treble damages for embezzlement or similar allegations that could form a basis for a criminal theft charge under Florida Statutes Section 812.014. See Zinn v. Zinn, 549 So. 2d 1141 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989); Nova Flight Center, Inc. v. Viega, 554 So. 2d 626 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989); Russo v. Heil Constr. Inc., 549 So. 2d 676 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989). We deem Rosen and Futch to be inapposite. Additionally, the trial court properly computed treble damages by including prejudgment interest as an element of damages. Cf. Argonaut Ins. Co. v. May Plumbing Co., 474 So. 2d 212 (Fla.1985). We further find no error in the other issues raised.
GLICKSTEIN and GARRETT, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Vining v. Martyn, 660 So. 2d 1081 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995)…“loss theory” applicable in Florida, prejudgment interest is merely another element of compensatory damages and that once a defendant is held liable for a plaintiffs damages “interest should follow as a matter of law”); O’Donnell v. Arcoiries, Inc., 561 So. 2d 344 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990) (recognizing that prejudgment interest was an element of damages in a civil theft ease). We are not persuaded by Vining’s argument that Martyn was not entitled to prejudgment interest because there was no date certain for the los…
-
Aspen Invs. Corp. v. Holzworth, 587 So. 2d 1374 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991)…ctual relationship does not preclude a civil theft action for fraudulent conversion, embezzlement, or similar acts. See Trend Setter Villas of Deer Creek v. Villas on the Green, Inc., 569 So. 2d 766 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990); O’Donnell v. Arcoiries, Inc., 561 So. 2d 344 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990). See also Tinwood, N.V. v. Sun Banks, Inc., 570 So. 2d 955 (Fla. 5th DCA); Masvidal v. Ochoa, 505 So. 2d 555 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987). With respect to the slander of title claims, the settlement agreement with the mortgage holders pro…
-
Gordon v. Omni Equities, Inc., 605 So. 2d 538 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992)…al relationship between the parties. Such a broad interpretation of these cases has been properly rejected by a number of appellate courts. See, e.g., Tinwood N.V. v. Sun Banks, Inc., 570 So. 2d 955 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990); O’Donnell v. Arcoiries, Inc., 561 So. 2d 344 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990); Nova Flight Center v. Viega, 554 So. 2d 626 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989); Zinn v. Zinn, 549 So. 2d 1141 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989). In Rosen and Futch, the courts were dealing with situations where a party was attempting to recover money pursuan…
Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Argonaut Ins. Co. v. MAY Plumbing Co., 474 So. 2d 212 (Fla. 1985)
- Murray Rosen v. Marlin, 486 So. 2d 623 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986)
- Futch v. Head, 511 So. 2d 314 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987)
- Russo v. Heil Constr., Inc., 549 So. 2d 676 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989)
- Nova Flight Ctr., Inc. v. Viega, 554 So. 2d 626 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989)
- Zinn v. Zinn, 549 So. 2d 1141 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989)