STATE EX REL. RICHARD W. ERVIN, ATTORNEY GENERAL,

v.

CITY OF ORLANDO

Citator

Cited By

• Miami Dolphins, Ltd. v. Genden & Bach, P.A., 545 So. 2d 294 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989)
  …and are entitled to know the provision’s meaning. See May v. Holley, 59 So. 2d 636 (Fla.1952); Jensen v. Dipaolo’s Italian Foods Co., 244 So. 2d 513 (Fla. 2d DCA 1970); Coast Cities Coaches, v. Whyte, 102 So. 2d 848 (Fla. 3d DCA), appeal dismissed, 106 So. 2d 198 (Fla.1958), cert. denied, 359 U.S. 310, 79 S.Ct.-880, 3 L.Ed.2d 832 (1959); Second, the trial court did not rewrite the club seat leasing agreement. Appellants interpreted the fee abatement provision to apply only to the absolute cancellation of a…
• Singer Island Civic Ass'n, Inc. v. Casetta, Ltd., 527 So. 2d 861 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988)
  …s not substantial. Casetta concedes that the order must rest on one of these positions. However, we conclude that the trial court misconstrued the legal effect of the facts. See Coast Cities Coaches v. Whyte, 102 So. 2d 848 (Fla. 3d DCA), dismissed, 106 So. 2d 198 (Fla.1958), cert. denied, 359 U.S. 310, 79 S.Ct. 880, 3 L.Ed.2d 832 (1959). Even if the court is of the view that enforcement of the contract imposes an unfair burden on one of the parties, this alone does not provide a sufficient basis to vary the…