Y.T., A JUVENILE, APPELLANT,

v.

THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Citator

Cited By

• Sears v. Forbes/Cohen Fla. Props., L.P., 223 So. 3d 292 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017)
  …ng a sign. Where the contract unambiguously gives Sears the right to sublease, we will not rewrite the parties’ agreements to add to the agreement, such as in this case, a prohibition on signage. See Peach State Roofing, Inc. v. 2224 S. Trail Corp., 3 So. 3d 442, 445 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009). To do so would effectively eviscerate Sears’s right to sublease and render its express contractual rights merely illusory. Forbes has also stated that the sublease is set to terminate soon and Sears would be unable to exten…
• 19650 NE 18TH AVE. LLC. v. Presidential Ests. Homeowners Ass'n, Inc., 103 So. 3d 191 (Fla. 3d DCA 2012)
  …entered partial final summary judgment in favor of the Association on the basis that 19650 had forfeited its development rights. A trial court’s interpretation of a contract is reviewed de novo. See Peach State Roofing, Inc. v. 2224 S. Trail Corp., 3 So. 3d 442, 445 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009). The same standard applies to the review of the entry of summary judgment. Id. 19650 argues, and we agree, that the trial court erroneously added a development rights forfeiture penalty to the language of the covenant. The t…
• Gerhardt M. Witt v. LA Gorce Country Club, Inc., 35 So. 3d 1033 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010)
  …tutes (2008) (“Factual findings determined in the voluntary trial are not subject to appeal.”). However, we review questions of law, including those pertaining to contract interpretation, de novo. See Peach State Roofing Inc. v. 2224 S. Trail Corp., 3 So. 3d 442, 445 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009) (citing Leopold v. Kimball Hill Homes Fla., Inc., 842 So. 2d 133, 136 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003)); Amica Mut. Ins. Co. v. Drummond, 970 So. 2d 456, 459 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007). II. The Limitation of Liability Provision In determining th…

Authorities Cited

• State v. R.R., 697 So. 2d 181 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997)