VIRGINIA J. SINK AND DEBORAH CROSS, APPELLANTS,
v.
EMERALD HILL OWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Proposal For Settlement cases and more on FLexlaw
[*1048] PER CURIAM.
Appellants Virginia J. Sink and Deborah Cross appeal an award of attorneys’ fees and costs based upon a proposal for settlement made by appellee Emerald Hills Owners Association, Inc., pursuant to Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.442, and section 768.79, Florida Statutes. We reverse because the proposal for settlement was invalid in that it failed to state with sufficient particularity the terms of the release upon which the settlement offer was conditioned. See Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.442(c)(2)(C) & (D) (stating that all relevant conditions and non-monetary terms of the proposal must be stated with particularity); Connell v. Floyd, 866 So. 2d 90, 92 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004) (stating that “a proposal for settlement should be as specific as possible, leaving no ambiguities, so that the recipient can fully evaluate its terms and conditions”).
REVERSED.
DAVIS, LEWIS and POLSTON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Nichols, 932 So. 2d 1067 (Fla. 2006)…1 Teletronics, Inc., 924 So. 2d 3, 6 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005); Dryden v. Pedemonti, 910 So. 2d 854, 856 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005); Palm Beach Polo Holdings, Inc. v. Vill. of Wellington, 904 So. 2d 652, 653 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005); Sink v. Emerald Hill Owners Ass’n, 903 So. 2d 1047, 1048 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005); Boyd v. Nationwide Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 890 So. 2d 1240, 1242 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005); Swartsel v. Publix Super Mkts., Inc., 882 So. 2d 449, 453 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004); Hales v. Advanced Sys. Design, Inc., 855 So. 2d 1232, 1233 (F…
-
E. Atl. Realty & Inv. Inc. v. Gsomr LLC, 14 So. 3d 1215 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009)…mbiguous to preclude its enforceability. We agree with BJV.9 In concluding that the proposal was ambiguous, the trial court relied on State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Nichols, 932 So. 2d 1067 (Fla.2006), and Sink v. Emerald Hill Owners Ass’n, Inc., 903 So. 2d 1047 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005). Neither supports the trial court’s conclusion regarding the specific proposal at issue here. In Nichols, two pending claims existed at the time the settlement proposal at issue in that case was made: a PIP claim against State F…
Authorities Cited
- Connell v. Floyd, 866 So. 2d 90 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004)