JEDAK CORP.
v.
SEABREEZE
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.
A landlord cannot recover damages for a tenant's breach of indemnification and insurance provisions when the landlord's insurer fully covers the losses.
[1] A landlord seeking damages for a tenant's breach of indemnification and insurance provisions must prove that the landlord incurred actual damages; full coverage by the la…
Previewing 1 of 1 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“where landlord's insurer fully covers loss, landlord suffers no compensable damages arising from tenant's breach of contract”
The court cited this principle from Cas. Indem. Exch. v. Penrod Bros., 632 So. 2d 1046, 1047 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993)
Jedak Corporation leased commercial premises from Seabreeze Office Associates under a written lease requiring the tenant to indemnify the landlord and…
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 Insurance Coverage cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
In this action arising from a written commercial lease agreement, Appellee,
Seabreeze Office Associates, LLC (“Landlord”), obtained summary judgment for damages arising from the breach of contractual provisions requiring that Appellant, Jedak
Corporation d/b/a Razzle’s (“Tenant”), indemnify and provide insurance coverage to protect Landlord from losses arising from Tenant’s occupancy of the premises. Although
Tenant raises numerous issues on appeal, we need only address one, which we conclude is dispositive of this dispute. Because Landlord did not incur any damages that were caused by the breach of these particular lease provisions, the lower court erred in granting summary judgment in favor of Landlord and in denying summary judgment in favor of
Tenant. Accordingly, we reverse and remand this cause with directions that summary judgment be entered in favor of Tenant. See Cas. Indem. Exch. v. Penrod Bros., 632 So. 2d 1046, 1047 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993) (where landlord’s insurer fully covers loss, landlord suffers no compensable damages arising from tenant’s breach of contract).1
REVERSED AND REMANDED.
COHEN, C.J., PALMER and TORPY, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Cas. Indem. Exch. v. Penrod Bros., Inc., 632 So. 2d 1046 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993)