TREASURE, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, APPELLANT,
v.
WHITE STAR REALTY CO., 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 held that while the chancellor's finding of no enforceable oral lease was supported by evidence, a specific forfeiture provision in the decree was unwarranted and should be stricken.
The plaintiff and defendant disputed the existence of an enforceable oral agreement for a lease. The chancellor found no such agreement existed, but i…
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 Question Of Fact cases and more on FLexlaw
At the conclusion of the trial of this case before the chancellor, both parties agreed and the court concurred in the view that the question of whether or not an enforceable oral agreement to make a lease on store no. 6 had been made was a question of fact to be decided by the court. The chancellor reached the conclusion that there was no such agreement and we find ample, competent evidence in the record which supports that conclusion. Under such circumstances, there is no basis upon which we may disturb the finding. In this connection also, we do not agree with the contention of the appellant that the chancellor misconstrued the legal effect of the evidence.
We must, however, disapprove that portion of the decree appealed from wherein the court said;
“However, in the event plaintiff fails to comply with the terms of this decree directing the removing from and the restoring of the possession of store No. 6 to the defendant, and restoring the premises to their original condition, as herein directed, within the time herein set forth, then and in that *867event, said lease dated December 29, 1955, between the plaintiff and the defendant to stores No. 1 to 5 inclusive shall stand forfeited and cancelled by reason of said plaintiff’s breach thereof, by appropriate order of this Court, after due notice to’ the attorneys of record for all parties.”
Under the facts developed in the case, this provision of the decree is not warranted and is stricken. See Hyman v. Cohen, Fla. 1954, 73 So.2d 393.
In all respects, however, except as above noted, the decree appealed from is affirmed.
Affirmed in part and reversed in part.
TERRELL, C. J„ and THOMAS, ROBERTS and O’CONNELL, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Lieberbaum v. Surfcomber Hotel Corp., 122 So. 2d 28 (Fla. 3d DCA 1960)…s of fact were included in the final decree and reference to the record reveals that these findings are based upon sufficient competent evidence. They are therefore binding upon an appellate court. Treasure, Inc. v. White Star Realty Co., Fla. 1958, 101 So. 2d 866. These findings are as follows: “On January 25, 1959, payment of principal and interest was due on each mortgage. A grace period provided by the terms of the instruments extended the time for payment until February 9, 1959. Those payments were not…
-
Scarfo v. Peever, 405 So. 2d 1064 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981)…race period. He contends he cannot be estopped to accelerate when payment was attempted outside the grace period because Peever had always previously paid within the grace period. Peever relies on the rule of Treasure, Inc. v. White Star Realty Co., 101 So. 2d 866 (Fla.1958): a trial court’s findings of fact will not be disturbed by an appellate court where there is substantial competent evidence to support its findings. Refusal by a trial court to enforce an acceleration provision denies a mortgagee a contr…
-
Bentley Mach., Inc. v. Ariga Textile, Inc., 365 So. 2d 187 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See Treasure, Inc. v. White Star Realty Co., 101 So. 2d 866 (Fla.1958); and Paul’s Drugs, Inc. v. Southern Bell Telephone & Telegraph Company, 175 So. 2d 203, 205-206 (Fla. 3d DCA 1965).…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Hyman v. Cohen, 73 So. 2d 393 (Fla. 1954)
- Maounis v. Igor Shamis (Fla. 3d DCA 2023)