WILLIAM BEVINS AND SANDRA BEVINS, APPELLANTS,
v.
JOSE ANTUNA AND JUAN ANTUNA, ALLIED MARINE GROUP, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, SEAN FENNIMAN, AN INDIVIDUAL, AND DAVID GENNETT, AN INDIVIDUAL, APPELLEES
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Escrow Agent Duties cases and more on FLexlaw
William Bevins and Sandra Bevins, the would-be sellers in a contract for the sale of a yacht, appeal a summary judgment order and subsequent amended final judgment awarding the would-be buyers, Jose Antuna and Juan Antuna, money damages consisting of $45,000 plus prejudgment interest. While we affirm the trial court’s summary judgment order in its entirety, we reverse the amended final judgment to the extent that it permits the Antunas to recover “the principal sum of $45,000” from the Bevins rather than from Allied Marine Group, Inc., which according to the summary judgment order served as the escrow agent in the transaction and continues to hold the funds. We agree, however, that the Antunas should recover from the Bevins the accrued prejudgment interest on their escrow deposit from the date the funds should have been returned to them. See Am. Linens, Inc. v. Venmall Int'l. Grp., 645 So.2d 1059, 1060 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994). We affirm all remaining issues raised on appeal and cross-appeal without further discussion.
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
DAMOORGIAN, CIKLIN and LEVINE, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Wright v. GUY Yudin & Foster, LLP, 176 So. 3d 368 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015)…est is reviewed de novo.” Reimbursement Recovery, Inc. v. Indian River Mem’l [*373] Hosp., Inc., 22 So. 3d 679, 682 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009). It is well settled that prejudgment interest is calculated from the date that payment was due. Bevins v. Antuna, 68 So. 3d 420, 420 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011) (“[T]he Antunas should recover from the Bevins the accrued prejudgment interest on their escrow deposit from the date the ■ funds should have been returned to them.”); Capitol Envtl. Servs. Inc. v. Earth Tech, Inc., 25 So. 3…
-
Current Builders OF Fla., Inc. v. Certified Lower Keys Plumbing, 105 So. 3d 582 (Fla. 3d DCA 2012)…verable, interest should be awarded from the date the payment was due. Id. [Berloni v. Della Casa, 972 So. 2d 1007 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008).] (quoting Celotex Corp. v. Buildex, Inc., 476 So. 2d 294, 295 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985)).”); see e.g., Bevins v. Antuna, 68 So. 3d 420, 420 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011) (“Antunas should recover from the Bevins the accrued prejudgment interest on their escrow deposit from the date the funds should have been returned to them.”); Santini v. Cleveland Clinic Fla., 65 So. 3d 22, 34 n. 15 (Fla. 4…
-
Miami-Dade Cnty. Expressway Auth. v. Elec. Transaction Consultants Corp. (Fla. 3d DCA 2020)…ay Plumbing Co., 474 So. 2d 212, 215 (Fla. 1985). “It is well settled that prejudgment interest is calculated from the date that payment was due.” Wright v. Guy Yudin & Foster, LLP, 176 So. 3d 368, 373 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015) (citing Bevins v. Antuna, 68 So. 3d 420, 420 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011)). See Lumbermens Mut. Cas. Co. v. Percefull, 653 So. 2d 389, 390 (Fla. 1995) (“[P]rejudgment interest is allowed in Florida for actions based on contract from the date the debt is due.” (citing Parker v. Brinson Constr. Co.…
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
- Am. Linens, Inc. v. Venmall Int'l Grp., 645 So. 2d 1059 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994)