AMBER PERRIN
v.
DE SOLEIL SOUTH BEACH ASSOCIATION, INC.
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.
Amber Perrin appealed the trial court's order denying her motion to enforce a settlement agreement against De Soleil South Beach Association, Inc. regarding repairs to her condominium unit. The court affirmed, finding that the plain language of the settlement agreement required Perrin to provide access for repairs the Master Association deemed necessary, not repairs Perrin deemed necessary.
The court affirmed the trial court's denial of Perrin's motion to enforce the settlement agreement, holding that under the plain language of the agreement, the Master Association had sole discretion to determine what inspections, remediation, and repairs were necessary, and Perrin's obligation was merely to provide access for such work.
[1] A settlement agreement is a contract subject to the plain meaning rule, and parol evidence may not be used to vary the unambiguous terms of a settlement agreement.
[2] A court's jurisdiction to enforce a settlement agreement is limited to the terms actually contained in the agreement, and a court exceeds its jurisdiction by enforcing no…
Previewing 2 of 2 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“A settlement is a contract. An unambiguous contract provision must be afforded its plain meaning.”
Court's foundational principle for interpreting settlement agreements as contracts
Perrin and the Master Association entered into a settlement agreement regarding building railing repairs and related work authorized by a City of Miam…
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 Settlement Agreement Construction cases and more on FLexlaw
Opinion filed March 30, 2022. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________ No. 3D21-1207 Lower Tribunal No. 16-28089 ________________
Amber Perrin,
Appellant,
vs.
De Soleil South Beach Association, Inc., et al., Appellees.
An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, William Thomas, Judge. Brodsky Fotiu-Wojtowicz, PLLC, Benjamin H. Brodsky and Joshua Truppman, for appellant. Young, Berman, Karpf & Karpf, P.A., and Andrew S. Berman, for appellee De Soleil South Beach Association, Inc. Before SCALES, LINDSEY and GORDO, JJ. GORDO, J.
Amber Perrin appeals the trial court’s order denying her motion to enforce settlement agreement against De Soleil South Beach Association, Inc. We have jurisdiction. Fla. R. App. P. 9.030(b)(1)(A).1 Under the plain language of the settlement agreement, Perrin was required to provide access to her condominium unit for the “Master Association to conduct any and all inspections, remediation and repairs to the building railings and appurtenant structural and cosmetic features as the Master Association deems necessary to complete the work contemplated by the City of Miami Beach work permit.” (Emphasis added). The trial court found no provision requiring the Master Association to make inspections, remediation and repairs Perrin deemed necessary under the plain language of the settlement agreement, rather it solely provided the Master Association with access to Perrin’s unit and the right to make any repairs it deemed necessary. We find no basis to disagree with the trial court’s construction of the plain language of the settlement agreement. See MBlock Inv’rs, LLC v. Bovis Lend Lease, Inc., 274 So. 3d 504, 509 (Fla. 3d DCA 2019) (“A settlement is a contract.
An unambiguous contract provision must be afforded its plain meaning.”
(quoting Lazzaro v. Miller & Solomon Gen. Contractors, 48 So. 3d 974, 975 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010))). As the plain terms of the settlement agreement are unambiguous, we do not resort to parole evidence. See Lentz v. Cmty. Bank of Florida, Inc., 189 So. 3d 882, 886 n.7 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016) (holding parol evidence should not be used to vary unambiguous terms of a settlement agreement).
Further, the trial court correctly found Perrin’s request that it order work done based solely on Perrin’s deeming the repairs were necessary would result in exceeding its jurisdiction by enforcing non-terms of the settlement agreement. Platinum Luxury Auctions, LLC v. Concierge Auctions, LLC, 227 So. 3d 685, 688 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017) (“[T]he extent of the court’s continuing jurisdiction to enforce the terms of the settlement agreement is circumscribed by the terms of that agreement.” (quoting Paulucci v. Gen. Dynamics Corp., 842 So. 2d 797, 803 (Fla. 2003))).
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Jeno F. Paulucci v. Gen. Dynamics Corp., 842 So. 2d 797 (Fla. 2003)
- The Travelers Indem. Co. v. Walker, 401 So. 2d 1147 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981)
- Baron v. Provencial, 908 So. 2d 526 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005)
- Lazzaro v. Miller & Solomon Gen. Contractors, Inc., 48 So. 3d 974 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010)
- Platinum Luxury Auctions, LLC v. Concierge Auctions, LLC, 227 So. 3d 685 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017)
- Lentz v. Cmty. Bank OF Fla., Inc., 189 So. 3d 882 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016)
- Mblock Invs., LLC v. Bovis Lend Lease, Inc., 274 So. 3d 504 (Fla. 3d DCA 2019)