MARCO PEREZ

v.

GPI FL-A, LLC AUDI NORTH MIAMI; PRESTIGE AUDI

Before: WALSH, TRAWICK, and SANTOVENIA, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Filing # 115082351 E-Filed 10/16/2020 09:42:43 See Rollins, Inc. v. Heller, 454 So. 2d 580 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984) (a claim for FDUPTA fails when the claimant does not prove a deceptive act which proximately caused actual damages, defined as “difference in the market value of the product or service in the condition in which it was delivered and its market value in the condition in which it should have been delivered according to the contract of the parties.”) (quoting Raye v. Fred Oakley Motors, Inc., 646 S.W. 2d 288, 290 (Tex.App.1983)); Dorestin v. Hollywood Imports, Inc., 45 So. 3d 819 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010) (consequential damages are not permitted in a claim for FDUPTA; a claim under FDUPTA may not be based upon oral representations in direct conflict with clear and unambiguous contract); Rodriguez v. Recovery Performance & Marine, LLC, 38 So. 3d 178, 180 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010) (finding that “under FDUTPA, the term ‘actual damages’ does not include special or consequential damages”). We likewise find no error in the exclusion of parol evidence nor in limiting trial to claims framed by the complaint. Farrey's Wholesale Hardware Co., Inc. v. Coltin Elec. Services, LLC, 263 So. 3d 168, 176 (Fla. 2d DCA 2018) (“It is wellestablished that the parol evidence rule prevents the terms of a valid written contract [*3] or instrument from being varied ‘by a verbal agreement or other extrinsic evidence where such agreement was made before or at the time of the instrument in question.’”) (quoting J. M. Montgomery Roofing Co. v. Fred Howland, Inc., 98 So. 2d 484, 485 (Fla. 1957)); Arky, Freed, Stearns, Watson, Greer, Weaver & Harris, P.A. v. Bowmar Instrument Corp., 537 So. 2d 561 (Fla. 1988) (trial is properly limited to matters framed by the complaint). The trial court did not err in directing a verdict on a count for reformation of a contract. See Romo v. Amedex Ins. Co., 930 So. 2d 643, 649 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006) (“To state a cause of action for reformation of a contract, the complaint must allege that, as a result of a mutual mistake or a unilateral mistake by one party coupled with the inequitable conduct of the other party, the . . . contract fails to express the agreement of the parties”).

We likewise reject Mr. Perez’s argument that he was deprived of discovery or that the trial court erred in preventing depositions midway through the trial. See Carriage Hills Condo., Inc. v. JBH Roofing & Constructors, Inc., 109 So. 3d 329 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013) (a corporate representative designated and produced by the corporation, “represents the collective knowledge of the corporation, not of the individual deponents. As the corporation's “voice” the witness does ‘not simply testify . . . about matters within his or her personal knowledge, but rather is ‘speaking for the corporation.’ ”) (quoting Rainey v. Amer. Forest & Paper Ass'n, 26 F. Supp. 2d [*4] 82, 94 (D.D.C.1998)) (citation omitted).

Finally, the trial court correctly denied Mr. Perez’s motion for disqualification, filed nine days after the trial court issued its written order in favor of Prestige Audi. See Sibley v. Sibley, 885 So. 2d 980 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004) (“‘The well-settled proposition is that the law ‘does not favor the substitution of a Judge or Justice in a cause after decision which essentially carries a benefit to the successful party.’”) (quoting Lawson v. Longo, 547 So. 2d 1279, 1281 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989) (citation omitted))); Lukacs v. Ice, 227 So. 3d 222 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017) (“where a judge's comments are directed to the issue the court is currently handling, a motion to disqualify can be denied”).

Accordingly, the final judgment entered below is hereby AFFIRMED. Appellee’s Motion for Determination of Entitlement to and Assessment of Attorneys’ Fees pursuant to section 501.2105 of the Florida Statutes (2018) is GRANTED and REMANDED to the trial court to fix a reasonable amount.

WALSH, TRAWICK, and SANTOVENIA JJ., concur. COPIES FURNISHED TO COUNSEL

OF RECORD AND TO ANY PARTY

NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL [*5] Copies Furnished to: [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected]