HARRY KENDEL AND CLARA KENDEL, APPELLANTS,
v.
HAROLD E. PONTIOUS, INDIVIDUALLY, AND HAROLD E. PONTIOUS, D/B/A LOT HEADQUARTERS, AND HENRY FERNANDEZ, 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.
The court held that a purchaser may revoke an offer to purchase real estate if the revocation is communicated to the seller prior to the seller's acceptance of the offer.
[1] Under the deposited acceptance rule, acceptance of an offer transmitted by mail becomes effective as of the date of deposit in the mail, unless otherwise provided.
[2] An offeror may revoke an offer prior to acceptance, provided the communication of revocation is received by the offeree before acceptance is effective.
Previewing 2 of 3 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceA purchaser executed a deposit receipt for real estate and later sent a telegram and letter revoking the offer. The sellers' attorney acknowledged rec…
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 Revocation Of Offer cases and more on FLexlaw
This is an appeal from a final judgment from the Circuit Court of the Eleventh Judicial Circuit in and for Dade County, Florida. We adopt the decision of the trial judge as our opinion. The opinion follows.
“THIS CAUSE came on for final hearing before me upon the complaint and answer. The Court has considered the record and file in this cause and has heard the testimony and proof of the parties and their witnesses and argument of counsel. The undisputed evidence discloses that a deposit receipt was executed by the purchaser, defendant Henry Fernandez, on January 13, 1969, and on the same date was mailed by the broker, defendant Harold E. Pontious, to the attorney for the plaintiff sellers. By letter dated January 14, 1969, addressed to defendant Pontious, the attorney for the plaintiffs acknowledged receipt of the contract and stated that he would have the contract executed forthwith and a copy returned to the broker. The contract, signed by the plaintiffs, was delivered to the office of the plaintiffs’ attorney on January 17, 1969. Notice of the execution of the contract by the plaintiffs was first communicated to the purchaser Fernandez by letter dated January 22, 1969. By letter dated January 17, 1969, *544defendant Fernandez wrote the plaintiff, Harry Kendel, with copy to his attorney, revoking the offer to purchase, which letter was in confirmation of a telegram dispatched the same date.
“Since the offer to purchase was transmitted to the seller by mail, if the offer or contract does not otherwise provide, it will be implied that acceptance would be by mail. In Morrison vs. Thoelke [Fla.App.], 155 So.2d 889, the Florida courts adopted the ‘deposited acceptance rule’ under which acceptance becomes effective as of date of deposit in the mail. Acceptance must be communicated to the offerer. Where an offer has not been accepted by the offeree, the offeror may revoke the offer provided the communication of such revocation is received prior to acceptance. 33 Fla.Jur. 365, Tucker v. Gray [82 Fla. 351], 90 So. 158, Montone vs. Bush [Fla.App.], 167 So.2d 884.”
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Kendel v. Pontious, 261 So. 2d 167 (Fla. 1972)…ADKINS, Justice. By petition for certiorari, we have for review a decision of the District Court of Appeal, Third District (Kendel v. Pontious, 244 So. 2d 543) which allegedly conflicts with a prior decision of this Court (Strong & Trowbridge Co. v. H. Baars & Co., 60 Fla. 253, 54 So. 92), as well as a decision of a Civil Court of Record (Jones v. Dobkin, 15 Fla.Supp. 70) on the same point of law. Fla.Co…
-
In re Standard Jury Instructions-Contract & Bus. Cases, 116 So. 3d 284 (Fla. 2013)…. Martinez-Arango, 251 So. 2d 707, 709 (Fla. 3d DCA 1971). 3. “Where an offer has not been accepted by the offeree, the offeror may revoke the offer provided the communication of such revocation is received prior to acceptance.” Kendel v. Pontious, 244 So. 2d 543, 544 (Fla. 3d DCA 1971). 416.10 CONTRACT FORMATION-ACCEPTANCE Both an offer and acceptance are required to create a contract. (Defendant) contends that a contract was not created because the offer was never accepted. To establish acceptance of the…
-
Travelers Ins. Co. v. Horton, 366 So. 2d 1204 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979)…Atkinson, 481 F. 2d 662 (5th Cir. 1973). Appellee, having failed to communicate her acceptance of the settlement by mailing the release to Travelers, did not bind herself to the terms of the proposed agreement of settlement. See Kendel v. Pontious, 244 So. 2d 543 (Fla. 3d DCA 1971). Further, an award of reasonable attorney’s fees in this declaratory action was not improper. James Furniture Manufacturing Company, Inc. v. Maryland Casualty Company, 114 So. 2d 722 (Fla. 3d DCA 1959); Section 627.428, Florida St…
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
- Tucker v. Gray, 82 Fla. 351 (Fla. 1921)
- Morrison v. Thoelke, 155 So. 2d 889 (Fla. 2d DCA 1963)
- Montone v. Bush, 167 So. 2d 884 (Fla. 2d DCA 1964)