PAULINE P. BURNS TRUST, WILLIAM J. KELLEY AND J. W. MORRIS, TRUSTEES, D/B/A PACIFIC LUMBER, APPELLANTS,
v.
ALBAN MECCIA, D/B/A LAUDERDALE MOTORS, APPELLEE
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.
The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment for the plaintiff on an account balance but remanded the case to require the plaintiff to return an unrecorded deed held for the defendant.
The trial court properly entered judgment for the plaintiff on the account balance, but the cause must be remanded to amend the judgment to require the plaintiff to return the unrecorded deed to the defendants.
“Appellants-defendants were in agreement as to the origin of this account and the amount that was due under it but sought to bar recovery by appellee through interposition of the affirmative defenses of accord and satisfaction and that of novation.”
This quote establishes the core dispute regarding the account balance and the defendants' affirmative defenses.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe plaintiff sued for the balance due on an account, and the defendants admitted the origin and amount but raised affirmative defenses of accord 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 Novation cases and more on FLexlaw
Plaintiff-appellee’s claim for the balance due upon an account plus interest was sustained through final judgment entered by the trial court sitting without a jury. Appellants-defendants were in agreement as to the origin of this account and the amount that was due under it but sought to bar recovery by appellee through interposition of the affirmative defenses of accord and satisfaction and that of novation. Upon the basis of the evidence and pleadings, the trial judge decided that appellants had failed to prove these defenses, but that the appellee had established his cause of action.
From a careful study, we arrive at the conclusion that the trial court acted properly as to the final judgment entered; but we find that appellee, as a result of negotiations which proved unsuccessful, has in his possession an unrecorded deed to certain property belonging to appellants. We, therefore, while affirming the trial judge in the judgment entered, remand *290the cause for amendment of it requiring' return of this instrument to appellants.
Affirmed but remanded with directions.
KANNER, Acting C. J., and SMITH and WHITE, JJ., concur.