SAM FURNARI, APPELLANT,
v.
HARVEY E. GOODMAN, 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.
Furnari appeals a jury verdict awarding Goodman $9,500 in damages for breach of an oral contract to obtain construction financing. The court reversed, holding that the lower court erred in excluding evidence of a federal court judgment finding the lender committed fraud and issuing an injunction, and that Goodman failed to prove the mortgage commitment was 'bankable.'
The court held that the federal judgment was admissible to prove the lender's lack of financial ability and the invalidity of the commitment, and that plaintiff failed to present sufficient evidence that the lender could or would honor the commitment, requiring reversal and entry of judgment for defendant.
[1] A duly authenticated copy of a final judgment is admissible to prove the existence and legal effect of that judgment when relevant to the issues in a case.
[2] A plaintiff suing for an oral brokerage commission must produce evidence showing the financial ability of the purchaser (or lender) to close the deal.
Previewing 2 of 4 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“the lower court erred in holding that the duly authenticated copy of the final judgment of the United States District Court was inadmissible to prove the existence and legal effect of the final judgment where such evidence was relevant to the issues in the case, particularly the financial ability of the lender.”
Establishes that authenticated federal judgments are admissible to prove a lender's financial ability and capacity to honor a commitment.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceGoodman, a mortgage broker, was employed by Furnari to obtain approximately one million dollars in construction financing for a proposed apartment hou…
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 Breach Of Oral Contract cases and more on FLexlaw
Defendant-appellant Furnari appeals a final judgment entered upon a jury verdict assessing $9,500.00 as damages in favor of plaintiff-appellee Goodman in his suit for breach of an oral contract whereby appel-lee, a mortgage broker, was employed to obtain approximately One Million Dollars construction financing for a proposed apartment house.
At issue here is the admissibility of certain evidence and denial of motions for directed verdict for the defendant. We reverse with directions.
Testimony was in conflict as to whether the appellant-defendant accepted the mortgage loan commitment from Church of Christ Manors, Inc. by its subsidiary, the Cultural, Education & Research Foundation, Inc. Testimony was also conflicting as to whether a commission would not be payable until the commitment was honored, and the money deposited, which admittedly would not occur for some time.
Appellant-defendant attempted to prove that the commitment was not and could not be honored through proffer of a duly authenticated copy of a final judgment of the United States District Court, Northern District of Illinois finding that the lender had made fraudulent misrepresentations of assets and enjoining such lending in interstate commerce.
First, the lower court erred in holding that the duly authenticated copy of the final judgment of the United States District Court was inadmissible to prove the existence and legal effect of the final judgment where such evidence was relevant to the issues in the case, particularly the financial ability of the lender. Perper v. Edell, 160 Fla. 477, 35 So.2d 387, 391.
Moreover, the court erred in denying the defendant’s motion for directed verdict where the plaintiff suing upon an oral brokerage commission, failed to produce evidence showing that the mortgage loan commitment was “bankable,” i.e., that banks would loan money on the basis of the commitment or that the lender was financially able to honor it. The general rule applied in real estate commissions is applicable here, that some proof is required to show that the purchaser, in this case the lender, is financially able to command the necessary money to close the deal on reasonable notice at the time stipulated. Perper v. Edell, 160 Fla. 477, 35 So.2d 387, *505391; see also: Cunningham v. Mitchell, 374, F.2d 356, 358-359 (5th Cir., 1967). The injunction, issued by the United States District Court, until it was dissolved or superseded, would obviously render the commitment totally unacceptable to any Florida bank or other banking institution asked to make a construction loan on the basis of such commitment; and by the express terms of the injunction would preclude the lender from acting in its own right.
Therefore, we reverse with directions to enter judgment for the defendant.
Reversed with directions.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Starr Freeman v. Ellis Rubin, 318 So. 2d 540 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975)…nvicted by the use of false and perjured testimony known by the prosecution to be false was without doubt relevant to the issues in the case sub judice, particularly whether appellant had a good cause of action. Cf. Furnari v. Goodman, Fla.App.1970, 242 So. 2d 503. The order is all the more relevant as it was entered pursuant to a habeas corpus proceeding and, therefore, was res judicata of all issues of law and facts involved therein. See Crane v. Hayes, Fla.1971, 253 So. 2d 435; 15 Fla.Jur. Habeas Corpus §…
-
Chanton v. Drucker, 299 So. 2d 145 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974)…led to a con-mission, some proof is required to show that the person who would be the purchaser is financially able to command the necessary money to close the deal on reasonable notice at the time agreed upon. See Furnari v. Goodman, Fla.App. 1970, 242 So. 2d 503; Perper v. Edell, 160 Fla. 477, 35 So. 2d 387, and 12 Am.Jur.2d “Brokers” § 184. The trial court erred in denying defendant’s motion for a directed verdict. Although other points raised on this appeal have merit it becomes unnecessary that this cou…
-
Mogul v. McCLASKEY Realty, Inc., 309 So. 2d 254 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975)…ady, willing and able to buy. There was no denial of the fact that the purchaser was unwilling. In this case there was no allegation of inability, and it was the seller, not the purchaser, who refused to hon- or the contract. In Furnari v. Goodman, 242 So. 2d 503 (3d D.C.A.Fla.1970), the inability of a lender to perform was manifest by reason of a final judgment entered by a federal court. The facts are only analogous to real estate commissions, and the Furnari court said: “The general rule applied in real…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Perper v. Edell, 160 Fla. 477 (Fla. 1948)
- Cornblum v. Eisenberg, 160 Fla. 477 (Fla. 1948)