777 Flagler Co. v. Amerifirst Bank, 88-3155
| Decision Date | 14 March 1990 |
| Docket Number | No. 88-3155,88-3155 |
| Citation | 559 So.2d 1210 |
| Parties | 15 Fla. L. Weekly D739 777 FLAGLER CO., Appellant/Cross Appellee, v. AMERIFIRST BANK, f/k/a Amerifirst Federal Savings and Loan Association, a Federal savings bank, Appellee/Cross Appellant. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Robert T. Scott, Peter J. Aldrich, and David R. Atkinson of Gunster, Yoakley, Criser & Stewart, P.A., West Palm Beach, for appellant/cross appellee.
Blackwell, Walker, Fascell & Hoehl, P.A., Miami, Randy Ellison of Jones, Foster, Johnston & Stubbs, P.A., and Larry Klein of Klein & Walsh, P.A., West Palm Beach, for appellee/cross appellant.
We have carefully reviewed the trial court's extensive order and findings of fact in addition to the parties' motions, memoranda of law, briefs and oral arguments. We conclude that there are no genuine issues of material fact which would preclude the trial court's entry of summary judgment. Moore v. Morris, 475 So.2d 666 (Fla.1985); Stewart v. Boho, Inc., 493 So.2d 95 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986).
We find the language of paragraph 16.27 to be clear and unambigious. The language clearly stated that the contract is not complete in material respects and would become complete, valid and enforceable only if the parties, prior to a specified deadline, are able to reach agreement as to form and substance of the exhibits. The undisputed failure of the parties to agree on the exhibits precludes the existence of any legally enforceable contract. Even when all other provisions of the document are taken in pari materia with paragraph 16.27, we reach the same conclusion. Thus, the trial court did not err in its interpretation and conclusion that a contract had not been formed. Zepfler v. Neandross, 497 So.2d 901 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986). Accordingly, we affirm the trial court's order granting summary judgment and all points raised on appeal.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Bragg v. Bill Heard Chevrolet, Inc., No. 03-11384.
...occurrence of an event. See, e.g., Huskamp Motor Co. v. Hebden, 104 So.2d 96, 98 (Fla.App. 3 Dist.1958); 777 Flagler Co. v. Amerifirst Bank, 559 So.2d 1210, 1211 (Fla.App. 4 Dist.1990). There was no condition precedent set forth in the RISCs themselves. The district court held that under Fl......
-
De Vaux v. Westwood Baptist Church
...2005); Allen v. Berry, 765 So.2d 121 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000); Drost v. Hill, 639 So.2d 105 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994); 777 Flagler Co. v. Amerifirst Bank, 559 So.2d 1210 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990); Balter v. Pan Am. Bank of Hialeah, 383 So.2d 256 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980); Brown v. Dobry, 311 So.2d 159 (Fla. 2d DCA ......
-
Drost v. Hill, 93-2000
...450 So.2d 277, 280 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984), quashed in part on other grounds, 468 So.2d 986 (Fla.1985); accord 777 Flagler Co. v. AmeriFirst Bank, 559 So.2d 1210, 1211 (Fla. 4th DCA), review denied, 574 So.2d 143 (Fla.1990); Balter v. Pan American Bank, 383 So.2d 256, 257 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980); Br......
- 777 Flagler Co. v. Amerifirst Bank