HTP, Ltd. v. Lineas Aereas Costarricenses, S.A.

• Decision Date: 13 September 1995
• Docket Number: No. 94-2779,94-2779
• Citation: HTP, Ltd. v. Lineas Aereas Costarricenses, S.A., 661 So.2d 1221 (Fla. App. 1995)
• Parties: 20 Fla. L. Weekly D2086 HTP, LTD., etc., et al., Appellants, v. LINEAS AEREAS COSTARRICENSES, S.A., etc., et al., Appellees.
• Court: Florida District Court of Appeals

Page 1221

661 So.2d 1221

20 Fla. L. Weekly D2086

HTP, LTD., etc., et al., Appellants, v.LINEAS AEREAS COSTARRICENSES, S.A., etc., et al., Appellees.

No. 94-2779.

District Court of Appeal of Florida Third District.

Sept. 13, 1995.

Rehearing Denied Nov. 15, 1995.

Metsch & Metsch and Lawrence R. Metsch, Miami; Miller, Hamilton, Snider & Odom and Lester Bridgeman, Mobile, AL, for appellants.

Richard Hyland and William J. Brown, Miami; Hoffman & Hertzig and Carl H. Hoffman, Coral Gables, for appellees.

Before NESBITT, GODERICH and GREEN, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

The defendants, Stephen H. Gamble, HTP, Ltd., and Tyler Corporation, appeal from an adverse final judgment.We affirm.

First, we find that the trial court properly ruled that the plaintiffs' cause of action for fraud in the inducement was an independent tort that was not barred by the economic loss rule.Burton v. Linotype Co., 556 So.2d 1126, 1128(Fla. 3d DCA1989), review denied, 564 So.2d 1086(Fla.1990)("Fraud in the inducement and deceit are independent torts for which compensatory and punitive damages may be recovered.").

Second, the defendants contend that the trial court erred by rejecting the defendants' proposed jury instruction regarding "unjustifiable reliance" that was prepared pursuant to Pieter Bakker Management, Inc. v. First Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n, 541 So.2d 1334, 1335-36(Fla. 3d DCA), review denied, 549 So.2d 1014(Fla.1989)("When negotiating or attempting to compromise an existing controversy over fraud and dishonesty, it is unreasonable to rely on representations made by the allegedly dishonest parties.").We disagree.

The instant case is distinguishable from Pieter Bakker because the plaintiffs did not rely upon the representations of the allegedly dishonest parties themselves, rather the plaintiffs relied upon the representations of an undisclosed agent.Wilson v. Equitable Life Assurance Soc'y of the United States, 622 So.2d 25, 28(Fla. 2d DCA1993)(holding that when the relationship between parties is amicable and not "plagued with distrust,"a party may not necessarily be unjustified in relying on the other party's representations).Therefore, we find that the trial court properly rejected the defendants' proposed jury instruction for "unjustifiable reliance."

Lastly, the defendants contend that the trial court erred by rejecting their proposed jury verdict form and instead, using a verdict form that instructed the jury to determine whether the defendants had...