DAVID LENNARD AND KATHRYN LENNARD, HIS WIFE, APPELLANTS,
v.
WATERFRONT PROPERTIES AND OTHER SELECT INVESTMENTS, INC., 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 Lennards appealed a jury verdict awarding damages against them for tortious interference with contractual relations and breach of contract. The court affirmed the breach of contract judgment but reversed the tortious interference award, finding no evidence supported the tortious interference claim.
The court held that no evidence was introduced at trial establishing that David Lennard interfered with the brokerage commission contract, and therefore reversed the tortious interference judgment. The breach of contract judgment was affirmed.
[1] A claim for tortious interference with contractual relations requires evidence that the defendant interfered with the contract.
[2] A defendant cannot be held liable for tortious interference with a contract when the contract's non-performance was due to circumstances unrelated to the defendant's acti…
Previewing 2 of 3 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“utterly no evidence was introduced at trial to establish that the counter-defendant David Lennard interfered with the contract between the original seller of the subject real estate and the counter-plaintiff”
Establishes the basis for reversing the tortious interference judgment—the complete absence of evidence supporting interference.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceWaterfront Properties was entitled to a brokerage commission from the original seller of real estate if the property was sold to the Lennards. The ori…
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 Broker'S Commission cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This is an appeal by the counter-defendants David and Kathryn Lennard from a final judgment, entered upon an adverse jury verdict, awarding the counter-plaintiff Waterfront Properties and Other Select Investments, Inc. $8,500 in damages on a claim for tortious interference with contractual relations against the counter-defendant David Lennard and $12,750 in damages on a claim for breach of contract against both counter-defendants. We find no merit in this appeal save for the contention that the trial court erred in denying the counter-defendant David Lennard’s motion for directed verdict on the tortious interference claim.
We reach this result because utterly no evidence was introduced at trial to establish that the counter-defendant David Len-nard interfered with the contract between the original seller of the subject real estate and the counter-plaintiff in which the original seller promised to pay the counter-plaintiff a brokerage commission for the sale of said property to the counter-defendants. To the contrary, the uncontradicted evidence establishes that the original seller was unable to sell the property in question and thus pay a brokerage commission to the counter-plaintiff because he lost the realty in a mortgage foreclosure action due to no fault of the counter-defendant David Lennard. Moreover, we conclude that this issue has been properly preserved for appellate review. See Tamiami Trail Tours, Inc. v. Cotton, 463 So. 2d 1126, 1127 (Fla.1985); 6551 Collins Ave. Corp. v. Millen, 104 So. 2d 337 (Fla.1958); Philpot v. Bouchelle, 411 So. 2d 1341, 1342 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982).
We therefore affirm the final judgment under review on the breach of contract claim, and reverse the final judgment under review on the tortious interference claim.
Affirmed in part; reversed in part.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Tamiami Trail Tours, Inc. v. J.C. Cotton and Aubrey Jesse Cotton, 463 So. 2d 1126 (Fla. 1985)
- 6551 Collins Ave. Corp. v. Beverlee Millen, 104 So. 2d 337 (Fla. 1958)
- John v. Philpot, 411 So. 2d 1341 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982)