TOMMIE LEE PRYOR, APPELLANT,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Citator

Cited By

• Fla. Tomato Packers, Inc. v. Wilson, 296 So. 2d 536 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974)
  …common purpose; (2) joint control ■or right of control; (3) a joint proprietary interest in the subject matter; (4) a right to share in the profits; and (5) a duty to share in any losses which may be sustained. E. g., Hewitt v. Price, Fla. App.1969, 222 So. 2d 247; Greiner v. General Electric Credit Corp., supra, Fla.App., 215 So. 2d 61; Kislak v. Kreedian, supra, Fla., 95 So. 2d 510; and Campbell v. Jacksonville Kennel Club, Inc., supra, Fla.1953, 66 So. 2d 495. In Florida a duty to share in losses actually…
• Gaines v. Nortrust Realty Mgmt., Inc., 422 So. 2d 1037 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982)
  …ndamental principle of the law of contracts is that there must be mutuality of agreement, and there can be no such mutuality when there is no common intention. Kuharske v. Lake County Citrus Sales, 44 So. 2d 641 (Fla.1949). See also Hewitt v. Price, 222 So. 2d 247 (Fla. 3d DCA 1969). Settlement agreements are to be interpreted by and are governed by the same principles of law interpreting and governing contracts. See Dorson v. Dorson, 393 So. 2d 632 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981); Dungan v. Colt Industries, Inc., 532 F.…
• Rafael D. Arango, M.D., & Taranco & Assocs. Anesthesiology Grp., P.A. v. Reyka, 507 So. 2d 1211 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987)
  …erest in performance of a common purpose; 2) joint control or right of control; 3) a joint proprietary interest; 4) a right to share in profits; 5) a duty to share in losses. [*1213] Kislak v. Kreedian, 95 So. 2d 510 (Fla.1957); Hewitt v. Price, 222 So. 2d 247 (Fla. 3d DCA), cert denied, 225 So. 2d 919 (Fla.1969). The hospital contends that as a matter of law, it was not a joint venturer, and that the evidence does not support the jury’s findings. The contract between the defendants describes the hospita…

Authorities Cited

• Belton v. State, 217 So. 2d 97 (Fla. 1968)
• State v. Youngblood, 217 So. 2d 98 (Fla. 1968)