ANTONIO U. SANCHEZ AND JOSE MANUEL BERENGUER, PETITIONERS,
v.
CRANDON WHOLESALE DRUG CO., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, RESPONDENT

Fla. | 1965-04-07
No. 33846
DREW, C. J., and THOMAS, CALDWELL and ERVIN, JJ., concur.
173 So. 2d 687 Florida Supreme Court (1965) Negative Treatment
Cited by 19 cases

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.

Synopsis

The Florida Supreme Court quashed a lower appellate court's decision that affirmed the dismissal of a complaint for breach of an oral contract. The court adopted the reasoning of another appellate decision, reinstating the complaint.


Holding

The Florida Supreme Court held that the District Court of Appeal, Third District, erred in affirming the dismissal. The court adopted the rule of decision from a conflicting appellate case.


Key Quotes

“On conflict certiorari granted we here review a decision of the District Court of Appeal, Third District, affirming an order of the trial court dismissing a complaint in a claim for damages growing out of an alleged breach of an oral contract.”

Establishes the procedural posture and the nature of the case being reviewed.

Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

The petitioners (Sanchez and Berenguer) filed a claim for damages due to an alleged breach of an oral contract. The trial court dismissed the complain…

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.


Opinion of the Court
ROBERTS, Justice.

ROBERTS, Justice.

On conflict certiorari granted we here review a decision of the District Court of Appeal, Third District, affirming an order of the trial court dismissing a complaint in a claim for damages growing out of an alleged breach of an oral contract. The historical background, nature of the controversy, and questions of law presented and decided appear in the opinion of the District Court in Sanchez v. Crandon Wholesale Drug Co., 167 So.2d 640, and it would serve no useful purpose to repeat them here. The decision of the District Court was divided with a dissenting opinion by Judge Charles A. Carroll. This court has jurisdiction under Section 4(2), Article V, Constitution of Florida, F.S.A., because of a direct conflict on the same point of law with Florida-Georgia Chemical Co., Inc. v. National Laboratories, Inc., 153 So.2d 752, decided by the District Court of Appeal, First District.

Argument having been heard and upon further consideration of the record and briefs, it is our view that the case is controlled by the correct rule of decision announced in Florida-Georgia Chemical Co., Inc. v. National Laboratories, Inc., supra, by the District Court of Appeal, First District, and which we adopt as our view.

Accordingly, the decision of the District Court of Appeal, Third District, in this case is quashed with instructions that the cause be returned to the trial court with *688directions to reinstate the complaint and proceed further in a manner not inconsistent with this opinion.

It is so ordered.

DREW, C. J., and THOMAS, CALDWELL and ERVIN, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Wright & Seaton, Inc. v. Prescott, 420 So. 2d 623 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982)
    …e lacking mutuality at its inception becomes binding on the promisor after performance by the promisee. (Footnotes omitted.) Not only does Florida follow that rule, Russell v. Martin, 88 So. 2d 315 (Fla.1956); Sanchez v. Crandon Wholesale Drug Co., 173 So. 2d 687 (Fla.1965), adopting Florida-Georgia Chemical Co. v. National Laboratories, Inc., 153 So. 2d 752 (Fla. 1st DCA 1963), but it is applicable under the circumstances of this case. If appellant continued to employ appellee, the latter promised that upo…
  • …39. In Florida, arbitration agreements are contractual and therefore they must fulfill the requirements of a contract. 4 Fla.Jur. Arbitration and Award § 8 (1978). Mutuality of obligation is a requirement, see Sanchez v. Crandon Wholesale Drug Co., 173 So. 2d 687 (Fla.1965), although the means of enforcement may differ without necessarily affecting reciprocal obligations. Bacon v. Karr, 139 So. 2d 166 (Fla. 2d DCA 1962). In effect, Roberts is alleging that the trial court departed from the essential require…
  • Ponce Dev. Co. v. Espino, 449 So. 2d 317 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984)
    …obligation at its inception in that the promisor’s (Ponce’s) duty under the agreement was optional. As long as the contract remained a bilateral executory agreement it was unenforceable against the Espinos. See Sanchez v. Crandon Wholesale Drug Co., 173 So. 2d 687 (Fla.1965), adopting Florida-Georgia Chemical Co. v. National Laboratories, Inc., 153 So. 2d 752 (Fla. 1st DCA 1963); Allington Towers North, Inc. v. Rubin, 400 So. 2d 86 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981). But when the contract became executed by the promisor’s f…

Previewing 3 of 10 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw