BCK Land, Inc. v. Cook, 1546

Decision Date20 April 1960
Docket NumberNo. 1546,1546
Citation119 So.2d 717
PartiesBCK LAND, INC., a Florida corporation, Appellant, v. George W. COOK, Appellee.
CourtFlorida District Court of Appeals

Berryhill, Leaird & Tedder, Fort Lauderdale, for appellant.

Monroe Gelb, Miami, for appellee.

SMITH, FRANK A., Associate Judge.

This action was brought to recover a real estate broker's commission, and the appeal is by the defendant from a judgment entered pursuant to a jury verdict for the plaintiff. The complaint was originally filed in the Circuit Court on April 29, 1959, but was later transferred to the Court of Record.

The plaintiff, a real estate broker, was one of the incorporators and a director of the defendant corporation, which was formed for the purpose of selling land in Hillsborough County. It is admitted that the corporation agreed to assume an obligation of $4,277.49 owing to the plaintiff for real estate commissions. The plaintiff agreed to deferment of payment until the corporation was able to pay.

Subsequently the defendant corporation offered to pay the amount due provided the plaintiff execute a release to the defendant corporation and to Hillsboro Acres, Inc., which plaintiff refused to do. A check dated April 20, 1959, was tendered to plaintiff in the amount of $3,319.11, which was the actual amount due since the corporation had paid $958.38 on behalf of plaintiff to an attorney to whom plaintiff owed that amount. The check showed the computation of the amount due by subtracting $958.38 from $4,277.49. The dispute was over the fact that the release would have constituted a general release of all claims against both corporations without limitation to the specific obligation for the broker's commissions. Plaintiff refused to execute the release and declined to accept the check.

During the trial the Court admitted the check and release into evidence over objection of the defendant, the objection being based on grounds that the check and release were evidence of an offer of compromise and settlement of a disputed claim. The overruling of this objection is the basis for this appeal.

The real issue was whether or not the defendant was financially able to make the payment and if in the discretion of its president all conflicting claims against the parties has been resolved so that the obligation had become due and payable.

The testimony is clear that the payment was not to be made until defendant was able, but there is much disagreement as to any other terms of agreement in regard to time of payment.

Appellee contends that any error in the reception of the check and release comes under the protection of the harmless error statute so that if it was evidence of an offer of compromise its allowance in evidence constituted only harmless error and would not warrant a reversal.

As pointed out by counsel there was written on the face of the check a notation of 'payment in full for commissions due to date by BCK Land, Inc. and Hillsboro Acres, Inc.' to plaintiff and 'Cook Realty Company.' Also it shows subtraction of $958.38 from the full sum of $4,277.49, leaving a...

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 cases
  • Florida East Coast Ry. Co. v. Morgan, 67--1005
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • August 20, 1968
    ...of a cumulative nature. Groover v. Hammond, 73 Fla. 1155, 75 So. 857; Stringfellow v. Adams, 99 Fla. 623, 127 So. 338; BCK Land, Inc. v. Cook, Fla.App.1960, 119 So.2d 717; § 924.33, Fla.Stat. F.S.A. The other proffer, which it is alleged the trial court erred in refusing to permit into evid......
  • Saleeby v. Rocky Elson Const., Inc.
    • United States
    • Florida Supreme Court
    • January 30, 2009
    ...suggests that the erroneous admission of evidence of a settlement is not subject to harmless error analysis. See BCK Land, Inc. v. Cook, 119 So.2d 717, 719 (Fla. 2d DCA 1960) (finding harmless error regarding admission of settlement evidence in violation of section 54.28, Florida Statutes (......
  • Yount v. Varnes, s. 96-0930
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • April 2, 1997

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT