HARRY POMERANC, APPELLANT,
v.
WINN-DIXIE STORES, 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.
A lessor sued a lessee for damages for breaching a lease covenant to return the premises in good repair. The lessee obtained summary judgment based on testimony from the purchaser of the premises (to whom the lessor had sold the property after the breach) that the purchase price reflected conditions negotiated with the lessor. The court reversed, holding that the lessor's damages claim was not diminished by the subsequent sale and that the proper measure of damages is the cost of restoration, not the change in property value.
The lessor's cause of action and right to recover damages for the lessee's breach of the repair covenant are not lost or diminished by the subsequent conveyance of the premises. The proper measure of damages is the cost of restoration to the condition required by the lease, not the difference in the property's value before and after the breach, regardless of whether the premises is ever actually restored.
[1] A lessor's cause of action for a lessee's breach of a lease covenant accrues at the time of the breach.
[2] The proper measure of damages for a lessee's breach of a covenant to repair is the cost of restoring the leased premises to the condition required by the lease.
Previewing 2 of 5 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 proper measure of damages for breach of this lease provision was the cost of restoring the leased premises to a condition that the lease required of the lessee.”
Establishes the correct legal standard for calculating damages in lease repair breach cases.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceWinn-Dixie leased property from Pomeranc under a lease requiring the lessee to leave the premises in good repair upon termination. Winn-Dixie vacated …
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.
COWART, Judge.
A lease provided that the lessee (Winn-Dixie), upon termination of the lease, would leave the premises in good repair. The lessee vacated the premises allegedly leaving it in disrepair. The lessor (Pomeranc) then sold the former leased premises to a third party. Thereafter the lessor filed an action against the lessee for damages for breach of the lease in leaving the leased premises in disrepair. The lessee obtained an affidavit from the new third party premises owner stating in effect that his purchase price for the property was based on the condition of the seller’s (former lessor’s) promise that either (1) that the former lessee would return as the purchaser’s tenant or (2) the lessee would restore the property to the condition required by the former lease. The lessee then movéd for summary judgment which the trial court granted. The lessor appeals.
We reverse.
Assuming, as the lessor alleges, that the lessee vacated the leased premises leaving it in a condition that violated the lease between the parties, the former lessor’s cause of action accrued at that time. The proper measure of damages for breach of this lease provision was the cost of restoring the leased premises to a condition that the lease required of the lessee. See Cunningham Drug Stores, Inc. v. Pentland, 243 So. 2d 169 (Fla. 4th DCA 1970); see also, 80 A.L.R.2d 983, Measure and Items of Damages For Lessee’s Breach of Covenant as to Repairs, § 8 (1961).
Neither the lessor’s cause of action for breach of lease nor the measure, or amount, of damages resulting from that alleged breach was lost, diminished, or destroyed by the conveyance of the leased premises by the lessor to a third party after the breach of the lease occurred. See, Gray v. Callahan, 143 Fla. 673, 197 So. 396 (1940).
See also, 49 Am.Jur.2d, Landlord & Tenant, § 979, p. 952 (1970).
The lessor is under no legal obligation to the former lessee to use money recovered from the former lessee as damages for breach of the lease to restore or improve the sold premises. See 80 A.L.R.2d 983 § 18 (1961).
The error in the lessee’s view in this case, and in the basis for summary judgment, is in assuming that the proper measure of damages is the value of the leased premises before the lease breach and its value after the breach and then considering the testimony of the new purchaser as being relevant to a determination of the value of the premises after the breach. Those matters are immaterial in this case1 under the correct measure of damages, which is the cost of restoration, whether or not the premises is ever actually restored.
REVERSED and REMANDED.
GOSHORN, C.J., and DIAMANTIS, J., concur. . Whatever the truth of the statement of the ' third party purchaser of the formerly leased premises, and its inference that the purchaser may be the beneficiary of some broken promise of the seller-former lessor, those matters are between those parties and do not in anywise inure to the benefit of the former lessee in this action by the former lessor against the former lessee for damages for the former lessee’s breach of a covenant of repair contained in the former lease.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
600 Cleveland, LLC v. Bank of Am., N.A. (M.D. Fla. 2025)…fenses) ¶¶ 14-18. 22 ---PAGE 22--- Case 8:24-cv-01652-KKM-AAS Document 43 Filed 04/28/25 Page 23 of 32 PageID 409 In moving to strike, 600 Cleveland argues that the Fifth District Court of Appeal's decision in Pomeranc v. Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc., 598 So. 2d 103 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992), demonstrates the legal insufficiency of the fourth affirmative defense. There, much like here, the lessee allegedly violated the lease by leaving the property in disrepair. Id. at 104. The lessor sold the property to a third par…
Authorities Cited
- Gray v. Callahan, 143 Fla. 673 (Fla. 1940)
- Cunningham Drug Stores v. Pentland, 243 So. 2d 169 (Fla. 4th DCA 1970)