TIMOTHY KIMBALL, JR., APPELLANT/CROSS-APPELLEE,
v.
STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, APPELLEE/CROSS-APPELLANT
TIMOTHY KIMBALL, JR., APPELLANT/CROSS-APPELLEE,
STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, APPELLEE/CROSS-APPELLANT
652 So. 2d 1266
Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (1995)
Caution
Cited by 4 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
We affirm on authority of Race v. Nationwide Mutual Fire Ins. Co., 542 So. 2d 347 (Fla.1989), and Florida Farm Bureau v. Shaffer, 391 So. 2d 216 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980).
GUNTHER, POLEN and FARMER, JJ., concur.
Other
ORDERED that appellee/cross-appellant’s motion filed April 18, 1995, for clarification and rehearing is hereby granted as to appel-lee’s cross-appeal, only to the extent that we reverse the trial court’s denial of appellee’s taxable costs. We remand for the trial court to assess such costs.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Totale, Inc. v. Smith, 877 So. 2d 813 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004)…had the alleged facts regarding it been true. The second standard is the “out-of-pocket” rule which awards as damages the difference between the purchase price and the real or actual value of the property. Id. at 891-92; see also Nystrom v. Fabada, 652 So. 2d 1266, 1268 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995); Nordyne, 625 So. 2d at 1286. “The ‘flexibility theory’ permits the court to use either the ‘out-of-pocket’ or the ‘beneflt-of-the-bargain’ rule, depending upon which is more likely [to fully] compensate the injured party.”…
-
Mortellite v. Am. Tower, L.P., 819 So. 2d 928 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002)…should deter others from acts of fraudulent concealment. We are remanding this case so that the trial court may recalculate damages under the out-of-pocket rule that compares the purchase price to the actual value of the company. Nystrom v. Cabada, 652 So. 2d 1266, 1268 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995). It is arguable that the actual value of this stock is its fair market value, $105 million, which is what a willing buyer would pay to a willing seller, neither party being obligated to act.…
-
Snyder v. Reinando A. Wernecke and Kathleen Wernecke, 813 So. 2d 213 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002)…se. Although the trial judge’s final order does not specify the legal theories on which the judgment was based, the trial judge’s findings of fact support the Wer-neckes’ fraud claim against Snyder in his role as owner/seller. See Nystrom v. Cabada, 652 So. 2d 1266, 1268 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995)(holding that seller who knew or should have known of structural defects in house had a duty to disclose them to purchaser)(citing Johnson v. Davis, 480 So. 2d 625 (Fla.1985)). Thus, even if the improper construction claim ag…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Race v. Nationwide Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 542 So. 2d 347 (Fla. 1989)
- Fla. Farm Bureau Ins. Co. v. Shaffer, 391 So. 2d 216 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980)