GOWER-GOHEEN REALTY, INC., APPELLANT,
v.
HERBERT BRAUN AND WILLA M. BRAUN, HIS WIFE, APPELLEES
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.
A real estate broker sought a commission on the sale of leased property after the lease term expired. The court held that when a lease option expires, the broker's contractual right to a commission on the exercise of that option also expires, even if the tenant holds over after the lease term ends.
The broker is not entitled to a commission on the sale because the contractual right to a commission expired with the lease option. Although certain incidents of a lease agreement may survive termination when a tenant holds over, the option to purchase and any related commission rights do not survive the expiration of the lease term.
“the tenant cannot extend the duration of his option to purchase by holding over, and the owner should not be required to evict the tenant whose occupancy he is willing to suffer because of an option agreement expiring with the lease”
Establishes the core holding that lease options do not survive through tenant holdover.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceIn 1961, Gower-Goheen Realty negotiated a five-year lease with an option to purchase for property that served as a motel parking lot. The appellant re…
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 Holdover Tenant cases and more on FLexlaw
After the expiration of a five-year lease with option to purchase entered into in 1961 appellees sold the property to the lessees, who had held over. Appellant, who had negotiated the lease, was paid a commission on the lease rental and claimed a commission on the subsequent sale. The option price was $85,000.00 less one-half of the rental payments to date of exercise. During the term of the lease the owners expressed a desire to sell. Appellant advised waiting until the lessee, which operated a motel for which the leased property served as a parking lot, came to them. On several occasions appellant claims to have mentioned to the lessee its need for the property, but did not actively pursue the matter. Lessee offered lessors $50,000.00 and then $57,000.00. Ten days after the option expired lessee advised Braun that it had a prospect for a restaurant on one end of the property and wanted their lowest price. Mr. Braun offered a price lower and terms better than the option had provided, and within a few minutes they made a deal.
The depositions, on which the case was submitted, do not show clear proof of conspiracy or secret negotiation. The appellant relies on Moylan v. Estes, 102 So.2d 855 (Fla.App.1958) and Oro Verde Groves, Inc. v. Fuchs, 136 So.2d 12 (Fla.App.1962), but these cases are founded on more substantial evidence than is before us. Clearly the broker was not actively trying to effect a sale during the last year of the lease.
Appellant also alleges that, since the lessee held over, the terms of the agreement were still in effect. This may well be true of the terms as they affect the tenancy, but the option had expired and was not exercisable. Rosamond v. Mann, 80 So.2d 317 (Fla.App.1955), annotated at 49 A.L.R.2d 476, and Wingert v. Prince, 123 So.2d 277 (Fla.App.1960), hold that certain incidents of the agreement survive the termination of the lease. These are logical decisions. The owner would not be expected to give up his rights relative to - the alcoholic beverage license in Rosamond, nor would it be sensible to require the tenant to remove buildings before termination if he holds over by mutual consent, as in Wingert. But, just as obviously, the tenant cannot extend the duration of his option to purchase by holding over, and the owner should not be required to evict the tenant whose occupancy he is willing to suffer because of an option agreement expiring with the lease. Most courts that have been faced with this precise question have reached this result. See the extensive annotation at 15 A.L.R.3d 470, 489 et seq. Thus appellant’s contractual right to a commission expired with the option.
Affirmed.
ALLEN, A. C. J., and HOBSON, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Douglass v. Jones, 422 So. 2d 352 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982)…he validity of the Lease, the Option to Buy terminated when the Lease expired. The terms of the Lease continued in definition of the tenancy itself, but the Option to Buy expired when the written Lease terminated. Gower-Goheen Realty, Inc. v. Braun, 215 So. 2d 499 (Fla. 2d DCA 1968). Moreover, the facts of the case do not form an equitable basis for permitting the appellees to exercise the Option to Buy. See Ledford v. Skinner, 328 So. 2d 219 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976). Therefore, the order granting specific perform…
-
Roundtree v. Smith, 448 So. 2d 1252 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984)…of 1977. Further, appellee contends that upon the expiration of the one month lease the appellants became hold-over tenants and that a “tenant cannot extend the duration of his option to purchase by holding over_” Gower-Goheen Realty, Inc. v. Braun, 215 So. 2d 499, 500 (Fla. 2d DCA 1968). In Gower-Goheen Realty, Inc., however, the parties did not contest the term of the lease or its expiration date. The provisions of the lease sub judice do not compel the interpretation that the lease created a tenancy for a…
-
Ledford v. Skinner, 328 So. 2d 219 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976)…ords insist that the Skinners did not exercise their option to purchase within the initial term or a renewal of the lease and, consequently, that the asserted exercise of the option to purchase was not timely. See Gower-Goheen Realty, Inc. v. Braun, 215 So. 2d 499 (Fla.App.2d, 1968); Howard Cole & Co., Inc. v. Williams, 157 Fla. 851, 27 So. 2d 352, 356 (1946); Annot., 15 A.L.R.3d 470, §7 (1967). ,The lease provided that its initial term would expire September 30, 1970, but that the Skinners might renew for t…
Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Moylan v. Sophronia I. Estes, 102 So. 2d 855 (Fla. 3d DCA 1958)
- ORO Verde Groves, Inc. v. Fuchs, 136 So. 2d 12 (Fla. 3d DCA 1962)
- Wingert v. Prince, 123 So. 2d 277 (Fla. 2d DCA 1960)
- Rosamond v. Mann, 80 So. 2d 317 (Fla. 1955)