SOUTHWEST FLORIDA AVIATION, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, AND JAMIE R. HILL, INDIVIDUALLY, APPELLANTS,
v.
NEW RIVER INVESTMENT ADVISORS, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, 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 court affirmed the trial court's enforcement of the settlement agreement but reversed the prejudgment interest calculation.
New River and Southwest entered a settlement agreement resolving a dispute over financing for a helicopter contract. Southwest paid for two helicopter…
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 Enforcement Of Settlement Agreement cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The trial court entered final judgment for, appellee, New River Investment Ad-visors, Inc., on its action for enforcement of a settlement agreement New River entered into with appellants, Southwest Florida Aviation, Inc., and its president, Jamie R. Hill. We affirm in part and reverse in part.
New River, Southwest, and Hill entered into a written settlement agreement that compromised and resolved a dispute existing between them regarding the provision of certain financing and supplying of a performance bond for a contract that Southwest was negotiating with the Indonesian government. The Indonesian government contract was for the preparation and F.O.B. shipment of twenty-one helicopters from Southwest’s place of business in Port Charlotte, Florida. The agreement provided that New River would be paid the sum of $75,000 per helicopter for each of the first four helicopters sold and delivered. The evidence showed that two helicopters were paid for and shipped F.O.B. Port Charlotte on May 26, 1997. The trial court awarded New River $150,000 under the settlement agreement. We affirm that award.
The trial court also found that New River was entitled to prejudgment interest on the verdict from the date appellees received their advanced payment for the helicopters. We find this was error. We remand for entry of judgment for prejudgment interest from the date the helicopters were sold and delivered, May 26, 1997.
AFFIRMED IN PART AND REVERSED IN PART.
STONE, SHAHOOD and HAZOURI, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Mariano R. Gonzalez and Rene Gonzalez v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 805 So. 2d 814 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000)…where the appraisal clause was invoked at the start of the litigation. IV. The final judgment is reversed and the cause remanded for further proceedings consistent herewith.4 We certify direct conflict with Nationwide Mutual Ins. Co. v. Johnson, 774 So. 2d 779 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000). . The appraisal clause states: 6. Appraisal. If you and we fail to agree on the amount of loss, either one can demand that the amount of the loss be set by appraisal. If either makes a written demand for appraisal, each shall s…
-
People's Tr. Ins. Co. v. Garcia, 263 So. 3d 231 (Fla. 3d DCA 2019)…nson, the Supreme Court resolved the conflict between this Court’s decision in Gonzalez v. State Farm Fire & Insurance Co., 805 So. 2d 8 814 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000), and the Second District’s decision in Nationwide Mutual Insurance Co. v. Johnson, 774 So. 2d 779 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000). In Gonzalez, the homeowners claimed that cracks in the walls and tiles of their home were caused by blasting, for which the relevant insurance policy provided coverage. 828 So. 2d at 1023. Their insurer, State Farm, denied…
-
Kendall Lakes Townhomes Developers, Inc. v. Agric. Excess & Surplus Lines Ins. Co., 916 So. 2d 12 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005)…2), causation of the damage is a coverage issue reserved for the trial court, not the appraisal panel. We disagree. In Johnson, the Florida Supreme Court reviewed two cases that were directly in conflict, Nationwide Mutual Insurance Co. v. Johnson, 774 So. 2d 779 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000), and Gonzalez v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co., 805 So. 2d 814 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000). In Nationwide Mutual, the insurer argued that the damage was as a result of an excluded cause, earth movement, whereas Johnson argued that the dam…