FRANK A. FUTERNICK AND KAREN BEBER, APPELLANTS/CROSS APPELLEES,
v.
NATALIA M. TRUSHINA, APPELLEE/CROSS APPELLANT
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Right Of First Refusal cases and more on FLexlaw
Frank A. Futernick and Karen Beber appeal from a final judgment in favor of Natalia M. Trushina, which ordered Futer-nick and Beber to specifically perform on their obligations under a contract with Trushina for the sale of their former marital home. Futernick and Beber assert that the trial court erred in enforcing the contract because Futernick had a right of first refusal pursuant to Futernick and Beber’s marital settlement agreement. Because the contract for sale did not incorporate Futernick and Beber’s marital settlement agreement, and because, in any event, Futernick did not comply with the conditions for exercising his right of first refusal, we affirm. See Andersen Windows, Inc. v. Hochberg, 997 So.2d 1212, 1214 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008) (“Courts, without dispute, are not authorized to rewrite clear and unambiguous contracts.”). We also affirm, without discussion, the issue raised on cross-appeal.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Futernick v. Trushina, 207 So. 3d 329 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016)…ay of execution pending appeal. The trial court granted the stay, conditioned upon the posting of a supersedeas bond of $250,000 to cover delay of performance damages. On appeal [*331] from the final judgment, we affirmed. See Futernick v. Trushina, 146 So. 3d 63 (Fla. 3d DCA 2014). On remand, further proceedings were held in which the trial court determined the amount of delay of performance damages. At that evidentiary hearing, the trial court took testimony and determined that the fair market rental valu…
Authorities Cited
- Andersen Windows, Inc. v. Hochberg, 997 So. 2d 1212 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008)