CJM FINANCING, INC., APPELLANT,
v.
CASTILLO GRAND, LLC, 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.
CJM Financing appealed a summary judgment dismissing its breach of contract claim for $50,000, asserting an oral promise to pay the remaining amount despite executing a general release. The court affirmed, holding that the clear language of the release barred the claim and CJM failed to properly plead a legal theory (such as reformation or rescission based on mutual mistake) to avoid the release.
The court held that the clear language of the release precludes the breach of contract action, and CJM failed to properly plead any legal theory involving mutual mistake (such as reformation or rescission) in a reply as required by procedural rules. Therefore, the summary judgment was affirmed.
[1] A general release bars a breach of contract claim when its clear language precludes the action.
[2] A party seeking to avoid an affirmative defense, such as a release, must file a reply containing the avoidance.
Previewing 2 of 5 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“The clear language of the release precludes the breach of contract action.”
Establishes the primary basis for the court's decision—the unambiguous release language barred CJM's claim.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceCJM Financing and Castillo Grand had a contract for consulting services with a total fee of $300,000. Castillo Grand delivered a promissory note for $…
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 Reply To Affirmative Defense cases and more on FLexlaw
CJM Financing, Inc. appeals a summary final judgment on a breach of contract claim.1 We affirm because the clear language of a release barred the claim and CJM failed to properly plead any legal theory that would have avoided the release.
CJM contends that it had a contract to be paid $300,000 for consulting services. Later, appellee Castillo Grand, LLC delivered a promissory note to CJM for $250,000. In return, CJM executed a general release of all claims against Castillo Grand. CJM asserts that, at the time it executed the release, an agent of Castillo Grand orally promised to pay CJM the remaining $50,000 due on the contract. Ultimately, Castillo Grand paid the $250,000 note in full.
CJM filed a breach of contract action for the remaining $50,000. Castillo Grand filed an answer and affirmative defenses; the fourth affirmative defense pleaded the release as a bar to the breach of contract claim. CJM did not file a reply.
The clear language of the release precludes the breach of contract action. On appeal, CJM contends that the release should not be enforced because of a “mutual mistake.”
By its failure to file a reply, CJM did not properly inject any legal theory involving a mutual mistake into the case.2 Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.100(a) provides that if an answer “contains an affirmative defense and the opposing party seeks to avoid it, the opposing party shall file a reply containing the avoidance.” To say that a “mutual mistake” has occurred is a statement without legal significance. However, a mutual mistake may be a ground for reformation3 or rescission4 of *865a contract. To have the release reformed or rescinded because of a mutual mistake, CJM was required to properly plead such an avoidance in the reply. See Aravena v. Miami-Dade County, 928 So.2d 1163, 1168 n. 1 (Fla.2006); Barnett Bank of Palm Beach County v. Estate of Read, 493 So.2d 447, 449 (Fla.1986); N. Am. Philips Corp. v. Boles, 405 So.2d 202 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981).
Affirmed.
STEVENSON and TAYLOR, JJ, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Martinez v. Preferred Care P'rs, Inc., 223 So. 3d 1117 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017)…elease. See Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.100 (“If an answer or third-party answer contains an affirmative defense and the opposing party seeks to avoid it, the opposing party must file a reply containing the avoidance.”); CJM Fin., Inc. v. Castillo Grand, LLC, 40 So. 3d 863, 864 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010) (affirming summary judgment “because the clear language of a release barred the claim and [the plaintiff] failed, to properly plead any legal theory that would have avoided the release”). Accordingly, the trial court properl…
-
Wilmington Sav. Fund Soc'y, FSB v. Integon Nat'l Ins. Co. (S.D. Fla. 2021)…he policy if the true facts were known, the Counterclaim states a cause of action for declaratory relief with respect to rescission. A mutual mistake may be a ground for rescission if plead properly. See, e.g., CJM Fin., Inc. v. Castillo Grand, LLC, 40 So. 3d 863 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010). C. Redundancy of Claims Counter-Defendant Wilmington lastly argues that the Counterclaim is redundant because “Integon’s Second Affirmative Defense, section c, squarely presents the issue of whether the Integon Policy is void…
-
Hendershott v. Ostuw (S.D. Fla. 2020)…se to a breach-of-contract claim. See Perry v. Merit Sys. Prot. Bd., 137 S. Ct. 1975, 1986 n.9 (explaining that, “[i]n civil litigation, a release is an affirmative defense to a plaintiff’s claim for relief”); CJM Fin., Inc. v. Castillo Grand, LLC, 40 So. 3d 863, 864 (Fla. 4th Dist. Ct. App. 2010) (referring to a release as an affirmative defense that may bar a breach-of- contract claim); Pontier v. Wolfson, 637 So. 2d 39, 40 (Fla. 2d Dist. Ct. App. 1994) (“The defense of release is an affirmative defense w…
Authorities Cited
- Providence Square Ass'n, Inc. v. Biancardi, 507 So. 2d 1366 (Fla. 1987)
- Cont'l Assurance Co. v. Carroll, 485 So. 2d 406 (Fla. 1986)
- Barnett Bank OF Palm Beach Cnty. v. Est. OF Leon Henry Read, Jr., 493 So. 2d 447 (Fla. 1986)
- Goodall v. Whispering Woods Ctr., L.L.C., 990 So. 2d 695 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008)
- V & M Erectors, Inc. v. The Middlesex Corp., 867 So. 2d 1252 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004)
- Aravena v. Miami-Dade Cnty., 928 So. 2d 1163 (Fla. 2006)
- McCONNELL v. State, 405 So. 2d 202 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981)
- N. Am. Philips Corp., Inc. v. Boles, 405 So. 2d 202 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981)
- Sunset Pointe AT Silver Lakes Assocs., Ltd. v. Vargas, 881 So. 2d 12 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004)