DADELAND SHOPPING CENTER, INC., APPELLANT,
v.
ELEANOR HULLMAN AND NATHAN HULLMAN, TRADING AS "CLOSETS BEAUTIFUL," 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.
Dadeland Shopping Center appealed a judgment granting specific performance of a lease renewal option to Closets Beautiful. The court affirmed, holding that the tenant satisfied the renewal option requirements by giving timely written notice of election to renew, even though gross sales figures were not included in the initial notice.
The court held that the tenant validly exercised the renewal option. The contractual language required only that (1) gross sales for the preceding two years exceed the minimum threshold (which they did), and (2) written notice of election be given more than six months prior to lease expiration (which it was). The contract did not require that sales figures be included in the notice itself.
[1] A lease renewal option requiring written notice of election to renew at least six months prior to expiration of the term does not necessarily require the tenant to provid…
[2] A court's construction of a contractual provision is entitled to deference if it is fair, reasonable, and supported by the plain meaning of the language.
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“Should Tenant's gross sales, as that term is hereinafter defined, in the premises during each of the two years preceding Tenant's exercise of this option, amount to Seventy Thousand, One Hundred Twenty-Five Dollars ($70,125.00) or more per year, Tenant may renew this lease for an additional term of ten (10) years upon the same terms and conditions (save that this shall be Tenant's sole renewal privilege) as are set forth in this lease; provided, it gives Landlord written notice of its election so to do at least six (6) months prior to the expiration of the term of this lease.”
The renewal option clause establishing the conditions for lease renewal, including the sales threshold and notice requirement.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe parties executed a lease dated January 3, 1962, containing a renewal option conditioned on the tenant's gross sales exceeding $70,125 per year for…
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 Specific Performance cases and more on FLexlaw
HENDRY, Judge.
This is an appeal by the defendant below which seeks to overturn a final judgment entered by the Circuit Court granting specific performance to the plaintiffs under a lease renewal option.
Following a trial before the court, the trial judge found that the plaintiffs had satisfied the terms of the option to renew set forth in paragraph 2, page 2, of the lease agreement dated January 3, 1962, which provides as follows:
“Should Tenant’s gross sales, as that term is hereinafter defined, in the premises during each of the two years preceding Tenant’s exercise of this option, amount to Seventy Thousand, One Hundred Twenty-Five Dollars ($70,125.00) or more per year, Tenant may renew this lease for an additional term of ten (10) years upon the same terms and conditions (save that this shall be Tenant’s sole renewal privilege) as are set forth in this lease; provided, it gives Landlord written notice of its election so to do at least six (6) months prior to the expiration of the term of this lease.”
Defendants have raised four points on appeal urging reversal. We have considered these points, argued together, in light of the record and the controlling principles of law, and have concluded that reversible error has not been demonstrated.
The crux of the defendants’ complaint is that when the plaintiffs’ attorney forwarded a written notice of election to renew the leasehold (concededly prior to six months before the expiration of the lease) the figures of the gross sales for the preceding two years were not supplied, and were in fact not supplied until after the option period had expired.
On the other hand, the trial court interpreted the contract as requiring only (a) that the gross sales for the preceding two years exceed the minimum figure of $70,125.00 (which in fact they had) and (b) that the notice of election to renew be given more than six months prior to expiration of the term of the lease.
It is our conclusion that the court’s construction of the option renewal provision was fair and reasonable and supported by the plain meaning of the contractual language which is included hereinabove.
Therefore, for the reasons stated, the judgment appealed is affirmed.
Affirmed.