OSVALDO GAYON, APPELLANT,
v.
BALLY'S TOTAL FITNESS CORPORATION, APPELLEE

Fla. 3d DCA | 2001-12-05
No. 3D01-425
Per Curiam
802 So. 2d 420 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (2001) Positive Treatment
Cited by 8 cases

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.

Synopsis

Florida appellate court affirmed summary judgment for Bally's Total Fitness, holding that the exculpatory clause in the health club membership contract was clear, unequivocal, and enforceable as a matter of law.


Holding

An exculpatory clause in a health club membership contract is enforceable when the language is clear and unequivocal, and the clause satisfies the public policy test.


Headnotes

[1] An exculpatory clause in a commercial contract is enforceable when the language clearly and unequivocally expresses the intent to be relieved of liability and satisfies t…

Previewing 1 of 1 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

Key Quotes

“[Exculpatory] clauses are enforceable only where and to the extent that the intention to be relieved was made clear and unequivocal in the contract, and the wording must be so clear and understandable that an ordinary and knowledgeable party will know what he is contracting away.”

Court stating the standard for enforceability of exculpatory clauses

Facts & Procedural History

Osvaldo Gayón signed a membership contract with Bally's Total Fitness Corporation that contained an exculpatory clause.…

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.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the final summary judgment. “[Exculpatory] clauses are enforceable only where and to the extent that the intention to be relieved was made clear and unequivocal in the contract, and the wording must be so clear and understandable that an ordinary and knowledgeable party will know what he is contracting away.” Covert v.

S. Fla. Stadium Corp., 762 So. 2d 938, 940 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000) (quoting Hertz Corp. v. David Klein Mfg., Inc., 636 So. 2d 189, 191 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994)), review denied, 786 So. 2d 1188 (Fla.2001).

The exculpatory clause in the health club membership contract Gayón signed satisfies the clear and unequivocal language requirement. See Borden v. Phillips, 752 So. 2d 69 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000); Banfield v. Louis, 589 So. 2d 441 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991).

Cf. Fairchild v. W.O. Taylor Commercial Refrigeration & Elec. Co., 403 So. 2d 1119 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981) (assuming clause intended as exculpation of liability, clause, printed in very small print and sandwiched between other sentences dealing with performance, is unenforceable).

In addition, the application of the public interest test shows that the clause is valid, enforceable and not against public policy. See Goeden v. CM III, Inc., 756 So. 2d 1105 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000); Banfield, 589 So. 2d at 441.

Affirmed.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Sanislo v. Give Kids THE World, Inc., 157 So. 3d 256 (Fla. 2015)
    …om liability was made clear and unequivocal and the wording was so clear and understandable that an ordinary and knowledgeable person will know what he or she is contracting away. Cain, 932 So. 2d at 578 (citing Gayon v. Bally’s Total Fitness Corp., 802 So. 2d 420, 420-21 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001)); Raveson v. Walt Disney World Co., 793 So. 2d 1171, 1173 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001); cf. Univ. Plaza Shopping Ctr., Inc. v. Stewart, 272 So. 2d 507, 509 (Fla.1973) (‘“A contract of indemnity will not be construed to indemnify th…
  • Cain v. Banka, 932 So. 2d 575 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006)
    …hat the intention to be relieved from liability was made clear and unequivocal and the wording must be so clear and understandable that an ordinary and knowledgeable person will know what he is contracting away. Gayon v. Bally’s Total Fitness Corp., 802 So. 2d 420 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001); Raveson v. Walt Disney World Co., 793 So. 2d 1171 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001). This district has rejected the need for express language referring to release of the defendant for “negligence” or “negligent acts” in order to render a rele…
    1 / 2
  • Tatman v. Space Coast Kennel Club, Inc., 27 So. 3d 108 (Fla. 5th DCA 2009)
    …that the intention to be relieved from liability is made clear and unequivocal. The wording must be so clear and understandable that “an ordinary and knowledgeable person will know what he is contracting away.” Gayon v. Bally’s Total Fitness Corp., 802 So. 2d 420, 421 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001); see also Raveson v. Walt Disney World Co., 793 So. 2d 1171 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001). A phrase in a contract is ambiguous when it is of uncertain meaning, and thus may be fairly understood in more ways than one. See Nagel v. Cron…

Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw