Long Key Corp. v. Willis-Burch, Inc., 61-151

• Decision Date: 19 October 1961
• Docket Number: No. 61-151,61-151
• Citation: Long Key Corp. v. Willis-Burch, Inc., 133 So.2d 655 (Fla. App. 1961)
• Parties: LONG KEY CORPORATION, a Florida corporation, Appellant, v. WILLIS BURCH, INC., a Virginia corporation, and American Marine Corporation, a Florida corporation, Appellees.
• Court: Florida District Court of Appeals

Page 655

133 So.2d 655

LONG KEY CORPORATION, a Florida corporation, Appellant, v. WILLIS BURCH, INC., a Virginia corporation, and American Marine Corporation, a Florida corporation, Appellees.

No. 61-151.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Oct. 19, 1961.

Rehearing Denied Nov. 10, 1961.

Kates & Ress, North Miami, for appellant.

William W. Charles, Thomas E. Lee, Jr. and Thomas A. Horkan, Jr., Miami, for appellees.

Before PEARSON, TILLMAN, C. J., and HORTON and BARKDULL, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

The appellee Willis-Burch, Inc., is the assignee of a claim owned by appellee American Marine Corporation arising out of a written contract of charter with appellant. The written contract was a time charter of a vessel at the rate of $750 per day. The charter began, under the terms of the contract, when the vessel left the docks of American Marine Corporation and continued until it returned to said docks, 'unless agreed otherwise in writing between the parties.' There was no written modification of the agreement between the parties.

In an action by Willis-Burch, Inc., to recover the unpaid portion due under the contract of charter, appellant filed a cross-claim against American Marine Corporation and a counterclaim against Willis-Burch, Inc. In substance, the cross-claim alleged a verbal agreement with American Marine Corporation that the contract of charter would be performed in four days, whereas, by reason of the negligence on the part of American Marine Corporation, the charter or contract was prolonged an additional ten and one-half days resulting in damage to the appellant in the sum of $15,000. The counterclaim alleged substantially the same facts as were contained in the cross-claim but in addition, further alleged that the contract of charter was completed prior to its assignment by American Marine Corporation and was, therefore, subject...