Brown v. Vining, 75--431
| Decision Date | 11 May 1976 |
| Docket Number | No. 75--431,75--431 |
| Citation | 334 So.2d 647 |
| Parties | Max J. BROWN, Individually and as Trustee, Appellant, v. J. Bruce VINING, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Norman F. Solomon and David M. Bernstein, Miami, for appellant.
Horton, Perse & Ginsberg, Miami, for appellee.
Before HENDRY, HAVERFIELD and NATHAN, JJ.
Plaintiff, Max J. Brown, individually and as Trustee, seeks review of an adverse final judgment after non-jury trial in a suit against defendant, J. Bruce Vining, a registered real estate broker.
Plaintiff's complaint alleged that plaintiff was a trustee and part owner, individually, of certain land which he sold to Forney B. Stafford, as trustee, in March 1971; that Vining, by contract, was to, and did, receive a brokerage commission for furnishing Stafford, as trustee, as the purchaser; that at the time of the execution of the purchase agreement, Vining was an agent of J. E. Greiner Company, Inc., consulting engineers to the Florida State Department of Transportation, who were retained to locate rockpits for expressway purposes; that Vining, by scheme, defrauded plaintiff by not advising plaintiff that he (Vining) was the true purchaser and that he was an agent for the Greiner Company; that Vining made a secret unconscionable profit from the land he purchased from Brown and, therefore, because of his fiduciary capacity as a real estate broker, a constructive trust was created in favor of the plaintiff which entitles Brown to a return of the real estate commission and profits made by Vining by virtue of the sale of rock to the Florida State Department of Transportation. Vining answered, denying such allegations, issue was joined, and the cause tried. After voluminous testimony, the trial court made the following findings of facts and conclusions of law,
'THAT in March of 1971, the Defendant, VINING, a real estate broker, answered a newspaper ad (Defendant's Exhibit A) run by J. A CANTOR AND ASSOCIATES offering land for sale. At all times, VINING acted and represented that he acted solely for the purchasers. This is admitted in Plaintiff's Amended Complaint. J. A. CANTOR, a registered real estate broker, was acting for the seller and had an ownership interest in the property as well. On March 20, 1971, Plaintiff contracted to sell the land to VINING'S purchaser, FORNEY B. STAFFORD, as Trustee for $4,800.00 per acre, a gross purchase price of.$289,872.00. It was admitted that after the contract, but prior to the closing, VINING informed CANTOR's sales manager, Sidney Houseman, that he, VINING, in addition to being the purchaser's broker, had an ownership interest as purchaser. (Transcript of Mr. Houseman's testimony Pages 6 thru 10).
THAT J. BROCE (sic) VINING knew that the West Dade Expressway was being constructed in the general area of the property. J. A. CANTOR, also knew, or should have known, that the expressway was coming through and maps showing its location were prominently displayed in CANTOR's sales office.
THAT this court further finds that the Plaintiff had knowledge at all times material to this cause of the fact that certain testing, i.e. surveys and obtaining of engineering data was...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hiestand v. Geier
...183 So.2d 215 (Fla.1965). "Clear and convincing" is also the standard of evidence required to prove constructive trusts. Brown v. Vining, 334 So.2d 647 (Fla.3d DCA 1976); Carberry v. Foley, 213 So.2d 635 (Fla.3d DCA 1968), cert. denied 222 So.2d 750 (Fla.1969). The standard that "evidence m......
-
McIntosh v. Harbour Club Villas Condominium Ass'n
...remove from the mind of the chancellor every reasonable doubt as to the existence of the trust." 113 So. at 424. See Brown v. Vining, 334 So.2d 647, 649 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976) (a constructive trust must be proved by clear and convincing In their fifth count, the plaintiffs seek damages against ......
-
Steinhardt v. Steinhardt
...imposition of a constructive trust in favor of the above-stated plaintiffs in their individual capacities. See, e.g., Brown v. Vining, 334 So.2d 647 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976); Carberry v. Foley, 213 So.2d 635 (Fla. 3d DCA 1968), cert. denied, 222 So.2d 750 (Fla.1969). It is settled that a construc......
-
Monroe County v. New Port Largo, Inc., 84-946
...Steinhardt v. Steinhardt, 445 So.2d 352 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984), pet. for review denied, 456 So.2d 1181 (Fla.1984); Brown v. Vining, 334 So.2d 647 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976), established its entitlement to the relief sought. Parramore v. Hampton, 55 Fla. 672, 45 So. 992 (1908); Turturro v. Schmier, 374 ......