JOHN POMEROY
v.
GRIFFIN WINDOWS AND DOORS, LLC
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 trial court properly granted judgment where the appellant failed to present sufficient proof of the proper measure of damages in a construction contract dispute.
[1] In a construction contract dispute, a homeowner seeking damages for improper performance must prove the proper measure of damages, which is the difference in value betwee…
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“it is the appellant's burden to provide a record that will overcome the presumption of correctness as to the trial court's findings”
The court cited Solomon v. New ERA Meat No. 2 for the principle that appellants must provide sufficient records to overcome the presumption of correctness.
John Pomeroy appealed a judgment entered against him in a dispute with Griffin Windows and Doors, LLC involving construction work. The trial court gra…
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 Economic Waste cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Affirmed. See Mole v. First Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass’n, 674 So. 2d 144 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996) (trial court did not err in granting judgment in accordance with motion for directed verdict where plaintiff failed to present proof of proper measure of damages, which was difference between contract price and reasonable cost to complete improvements); Grossman Holdings, Ltd. v. Hourihan, 414 So. 2d 1037 (Fla. 1982) (homeowners not entitled to total breach damages where house was built in opposite direction of that specified in contract, and having house torn down and rebuilt to original specifications would constitute economic waste; homeowners were entitled to any difference in value as of date of delivery between house homeowners contracted for and house that was ultimately built, and burden was on homeowners to prove any such difference); see also Ponn v. Metro Express, Inc., et al., No. 3D22-991, 2023 WL 5731753 (Fla. 3d DCA Sept. 6, 2023) (“The choice to provide piecemeal transcripts deprived this Court of the ability to review the record as a while. Absent a full transcript, this Court cannot determine whether the evidence presented . . . at trial supported her argument . . . .”); Solomon v. New ERA Meat No. 2, 961 So. 2d 989, 989 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007) (stating “it is the appellant’s burden to provide a record that will overcome the presumption of correctness as to the trial court’s findings” (quoting Smith v. Orhama, Inc., 907 So. 2d 594, 596 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005))); S. Fla. Apartment Ass’n, Inc. v. Dansyear, 347 So. 2d 710, 711 (Fla.
2 3d DCA 1977) (holding that appellant’s failure “to provide the appellate court with a record sufficient to review the matter assigned as error” leaves appellate court “no alternative but to assume that the trial court ruled correctly”).
3
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Del Valle v. SafePoint Ins. Co., 48 Fla. L. Weekly D1786 (Fla. 3d DCA 2024)
Authorities Cited
- Grossman Holdings Ltd. v. Hourihan, 414 So. 2d 1037 (Fla. 1982)
- S. Fla. Apt. Ass'n, Inc. v. Dansyear, 347 So. 2d 710 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977)
- Smith v. Orhama Inc., 907 So. 2d 594 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005)
- Mole v. First Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n, 674 So. 2d 144 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996)