FEDERATED DEPARTMENT STORES, INC., A DELAWARE CORPORATION, D/B/A BURDINES, APPELLANT,
v.
ANTIGO INDUSTRIES, INC., A CORPORATION, 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.
Federated Department Stores (Burdines) appealed a judgment for $6,041.67 owed to Antigo Industries on an account stated. The appellate court affirmed, holding that the account statement was properly admitted as a business record despite being prepared nine months after the initial transactions, as it was part of a regular monthly statement practice.
The trial court properly admitted the March 22, 1971 account statement as a business record. Although prepared nine months after the initial transactions, it was one of several monthly statements regularly sent to the defendant during the course of business, satisfying the business record exception to hearsay.
[1] A statement of account sent to a customer, reflecting amounts due for goods sold and credits, may be admissible as a business record if it is shown to be one of several s…
[2] A defendant's dispute over deductions on an account stated, while not challenging the underlying amounts, may implicitly admit the correctness of those amounts.
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 intelligence“An examination of the record reveals that plaintiff's president testified that the subject statement was one of several monthly statements which were sent to the defendant during the period of their business transactions. Thus, we cannot say that this statement is devoid of any business regularity.”
Establishes that the business record exception was satisfied because the statement was part of a regular monthly practice, despite the nine-month delay.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAntigo Industries and Burdines engaged in business transactions between April and June 1970. On March 22, 1971, Antigo sent Burdines a detailed accoun…
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 Regular Course Of Business cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Defendant-appellant appeals an adverse final judgment awarding plaintiff $6,041.67 in this action to recover on an account stated.
Plaintiff-appellee, Antigo Industries, Inc., was engaged in certain business transactions with the defendant-appellant, Burdines, between April 1970 and June 1970. On March 22, 1971 plaintiff sent to the defendant an account statement reflecting the dates and invoice numbers of the goods sold, the amounts thereof, credits to the defendant and an outstanding balance of $6,041.67. A dispute over this balance arose as the defendant claimed certain deductions which the plaintiff asserted were unauthorized and improperly taken. Thereafter, plaintiff-appellee filed an amended complaint wherein it sought to recover the balance of $6,041.67 against the defendant. Attached thereto was the above statement of March 22. The cause came on for trial, at which time plaintiff over defendant’s objection was permitted to introduce into evidence as a business record a copy of the March 22, 1971 statement which plaintiff’s president testified was one of several such statements prepared in the usual course of its business and sent to the defendant. At the close of plaintiff’s case, defendant moved for an involuntary dismissal and as grounds therefor alleged error in the admission into evidence over defendant’s objection of the copy of the statement of account because it was not a proper business record since it was neither made contemporaneously with the transactions nor made in the regular course of plaintiff’s business. The motion was denied and at the conclusion of defendant’s case the trial judge entered final judgment for the plaintiff in the sum of $6,041.67 plus interest and costs. Defendant appeals therefrom.
Appellant’s sole contention on appeal is that the trial court committed error in admitting into evidence plaintiff’s statement of account made nine months after the first transaction between the parties as a business record of the plaintiff. We disagree.
An examination of the record reveals that plaintiff’s president testified that the subject statement was one of several monthly statements which were sent to the defendant during the period of their business transactions. Thus, we cannot say that this statement is devoid of any business regularity. Cf. E.Z.E., Inc. v. Jackson, Fla.App. 1970, 235 So. 2d 337. Further, defendant-appellant does not quarrel with the sums reflected on this statement, but rather argues that it was entitled to certain set-off credits thereby impliedly admitting the correctness of the amounts on the account stated. See Stephens Lumber Co. v. Cates, 62 Fla. 382, 56 So. 298 (1911).
Accordingly, the judgment herein appealed is affirmed.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Farley v. Chase Bank, 37 So. 3d 936 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010)…o. 445, 447 (Fla.1904); Gendzier v. Bielecki, 97 So. 2d 604, 608 (Fla.1957). An objection “impliedly admit[s] the correctness of the amounts on the account stated” when it does not challenge them. Federated Dep’t Stores, Inc. v. Antigo Indus., Inc., 297 So. 2d 591, 592-93 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974); see also Breezy Bay, Inc. v. Industria Maquiladora Mexicana, S.A., 361 So. 2d 440, 441 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978). A debtor may overcome a prima facie case of an account stated by “meeting the burden of proving fraud, mistake[,]…
-
Breezy BAY, Inc. v. Industria Maquiladora Mexicana, 361 So. 2d 440 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978)…it was entitled to a set off as a result of the garments destroyed by the fire and machinery sold to IMM. Thus, Breezy Bay impliedly admitted to the correctness of the amounts of the invoices. See Federated Dept. Stores, Inc. v. Antigo Indus., Inc., 297 So. 2d 591 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974). Breezy Bay also urges as error the denial of its motion for directed verdict. We find this point lacks merit because the record reflects stipulations as to the fact that the original invoices were sent to Breezy Bay and Breezy B…
-
Arnett v. State, 843 So. 2d 340 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003)…(Fla. 3d DCA 1991)(holding that a ledger sheet on gem transactions was admissible even though prepared by a person lacking personal knowledge of the matters recorded in the ledger sheet); see also Federated Dep’t Stores, Inc. v. Antigo Indus., Inc., 297 So. 2d 591, 592 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974)(“[P]lain-tiffs president testified that the subject statement was one of several monthly statements which were sent to the defendant during the period of their business transactions,” thus the statement was not devoid of any…
Previewing 3 of 8 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Stephens Lumber Co. v. Cates, 62 Fla. 382 (Fla. 1911)
- E. Z. E. Inc. v. Jackson, 235 So. 2d 337 (Fla. 4th DCA 1970)