THE ROBERTS CO., INC., APPELLANT,
v.
P. B. O. LTD., 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.
The court held that a breach of an oral contract for the sale of realty cannot be converted into a tort of wrongful interference with a contractual relationship.
Plaintiff sued defendant for breach of an oral agreement to sell a hotel and for wrongful interference with a contractual relationship. The trial cour…
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 Statute Of Frauds cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The Roberts Co. Inc., appeals an order granting defense motion to strike count'll of its complaint for wrongful interference with a contractual relationship.
Plaintiff filed a three count complaint against P. B. O. Ltd. seeking compensatory and punitive damages based upon the breach of an alleged oral agreement by P B O to sell to the plaintiff the Playboy Plaza Hotel. P B O responded with a motion to strike all three counts, and the trial judge entered an order striking counts I and II.
Plaintiff argues that although the trial judge was correct in striking count I for breach of the alleged oral contract for sale of realty as same was barred by the Statute of Frauds, it was error to strike count II alleging tortious interference with a contractual relationship.
The contractual relationship with which defendant allegedly interfered consisted of the favorable arrangements plaintiff had made with Investors Diversified Services, a well established financier of real estate transactions, for financing the purchase of the hotel.
The tortious conduct alleged in count II is predicated upon defendant’s breach of an oral promise to convey realty and the Statute of Frauds has been held to bar such tort actions and, in essence, these actions are an attempt to recover for breach of an unenforceable contract. See Canell v. Arcola Housing Corp., Fla.1953, 65 So. 2d 849, 850; Neveils v. Thagard, Fla.App. 1962, 145 So. 2d 495; Ashland Oil, Inc. v. Pickard, Fla.App.1972, 269 So. 2d 714, 721.
In addition, the existence of a cause of action for wrongful interference with contractual rights is recognized only when the interference is by a third person. See Days v. Florida East Coast Railway Company, Fla.App.1964, 165 So. 2d 434, 436. P B O allegedly having breached its contract with the plaintiff, this breach of contract may not be converted into a tort by allegation of wrongful interference with a favorable financial relationship.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
United Yacht Brokers, Inc. v. Gillespie, 377 So. 2d 668 (Fla. 1979)…nature of the alleged contract between United and Johnson does not bar a suit for intentional interference with a contract or an existing business relationship against Anstett and Siewert. Anstett and Siewert have cited Roberts Co. v. P.B.O. Ltd., 322 So. 2d 633 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975), for the proposition that a contract, unenforceable for failure to comply with the statute of frauds, cannot support an action for tortious interference. That case is readily distinguishable from the instant case. In Roberts Co. t…
-
Ethyl Corp. v. Balter, 386 So. 2d 1220 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980)…e who is himself a party to the contract allegedly interfered with. E. g., United Yacht Brokers, Inc. v. Gillespie, supra; Paradise Shores Apts., Inc. v. Practical Maintenance Co., 344 So. 2d 299 (Fla. 2d DCA 1977); Roberts Co., Inc. v. P.B.O. Ltd., 322 So. 2d 633 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975); Days v. Florida East Coast R. Co., 165 So. 2d 434 (Fla. 3d DCA 1964); see Berenson v. World Jai-Alai, Inc., 374 So. 2d 35 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979). There is, moreover, a completely separate, additional, and overriding reason which pre…
-
Paradise Shores Apts., Inc. v. Practical Maint. Co., Inc., 344 So. 2d 299 (Fla. 2d DCA 1977)…actual relation only where the interference is caused by a third party, this count is dismissed with prejudice as to defendants herein. Days v. Florida East Coast Railway Company, 165 So. 2d 434 (Fla.3d DCA 1964); Roberts Co., Inc. v. P. B. O. Ltd., 322 So. 2d 633 (Fla.3d DCA 1975). As to maintenance of a class action on the alleged breach of contract, we think that plaintiff’s complaint, memoranda, and briefs facially set out all the necessary elements required under the statute and pertinent case law. Howe…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Ashland OIL, Inc. v. Rod Pickard, 269 So. 2d 714 (Fla. 3d DCA 1972)
- Canell v. Arcola Hous. Corp., 65 So. 2d 849 (Fla. 1953)
- Days v. Fla. E. Coast Ry. Co., 165 So. 2d 434 (Fla. 3d DCA 1964)
- Neveils v. Thagard, 145 So. 2d 495 (Fla. 1st DCA 1962)