Keller v. Penovich, 71--892
| Decision Date | 19 May 1972 |
| Docket Number | No. 71--892,71--892 |
| Citation | 262 So.2d 243 |
| Parties | Elizabeth M. KELLER, Appellant, v. Joseph PENOVICH, Penmark Corporation, a Florida corporation, d/b/a Redwood Inn, and Redwood Electric Company, Appellees. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Robert B. Cook, West Palm Beach, and Gilbert T. Brophy, Tequesta, for appellant.
Alan Lindsay, of Alley, Maass, Rogers, Lindsay & Chauncey, Palm Beach, for appellees.
Plaintiff-appellant entered into a two-year oral employment contract. It was breached by defendant and plaintiff seeks damages.
The trial judge ruled the contract unenforceable as violative of the Statute of Frauds, Chapter 725.01, F.S.1969, F.S.A. Plaintiff alleges several reversible errors but we find them without merit and affirm.
Plaintiff tried to amend her factual averments in her amended pleadings to allege a year to year contract, a concept repugnant and inconsistent with the numerous sworn statements of both parties and their proponents. Plaintiff was properly estopped to so amend. Palm Beach Co. v. Palm Beach Estates, 1933, 110 Fla. 77, 148 So. 544; Federated Mutual Implement and Hardware Insurance Company v. Griffin, Fla.App.1970, 237 So.2d 38.
We further find that summary judgment was applicable here because all parties were in agreement concerning the material and critical issues of fact. Additionally promissory estoppel is not controlling on oral employment contracts. Tanenbaum v. Biscayne Osteopathic Hospital, Inc., Fla.1966, 190 So.2d 777.
Affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Allen v. A. G. Edwards & Sons, Inc.
...past the credit's original expiration date. See also In re Estate of Ingram, 302 So.2d 204 (Fla. 2d DCA 1974); Keller v. Penovich, 262 So.2d 243 (Fla. 4th DCA 1972). We are bound by these recognitions of promissory estoppel, absent indication by Florida's highest court that the decisions do......
-
Geodata Services, Inc. v. W. R. Grace and Co.
...the respondent instead of taking the position, rather tardily that they did not apply to him. 190 So.2d at 779. In Keller v. Penovich, 262 So.2d 243, 244 (Fla. 4th DCA 1972), the court held, relying on Tanenbaum, that promissory estoppel is not controlling on oral employment contracts. But ......
-
Davis v. Ferraro, 74--232
...193 So.2d 480; Niagara of Florida, Inc. v. Niagara Therapy Manufacturing Corporation, Fla.App.1970, 231 So.2d 277; Keller v. Penovich, Fla.App.1972, 262 So.2d 243; Lewin v. U.S. Industries, Inc., Fla.App.1973, 272 So.2d Therefore, the final judgment under review be and the same is hereby re......
-
Gutierrez v. Mount Sinai Hospital of Greater Miami, Inc, 76-216
...and CHARLES CARROLL (Ret.), Associate Judge. PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See Holl v. Talcott, 191 So.2d 40 (Fla.1966), and Keller v. Penovich, 262 So.2d 243 (Fla.4th DCA1972). Compare Edwards v. Doherty, 74 So.2d 686 (Fla.1954), and Paddock v. Bay Concrete Industries, Inc., 154 So.2d 313 (Fla.2d ...
-
Contract cases
...505 (Fla. 1982). 7. Oral Employment Contracts: Promissory estoppel is not controlling on oral employment contracts. Keller v. Penovich , 262 So.2d 243, 244 (Fla. 4th DCA 1972). 8. Sovereign, The: The law of this state recognizes that the theory of promissory estoppel applies to the sovereig......