Moyant v. Beattie, 89-1545
| Decision Date | 30 May 1990 |
| Docket Number | No. 89-1545,89-1545 |
| Citation | 561 So.2d 1319 |
| Parties | 15 Fla. L. Weekly D1463 John MOYANT, Appellant, v. Elizabeth R. BEATTIE, et al., Appellees. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Robert D. Lettman, Tamarac, for appellant.
Edward J. O'Hare, Coral Springs, for appellees.
John Moyant, a real estate broker, appeals the final judgment that awarded damages to appellees, who had contracted to purchase real estate. He failed to return their deposit stolen by his salesperson.
The issue we address is whether appellees had standing to bring a cause of action under Chapter 475, Florida Statutes (1989), which all parties agree regulates Florida real estate brokers and salepersons. However, appellant contends that the chapter does not provide for actions by private persons.
The general rule for actions based on violations of statutory duties is found at 49 Fla. Jur. 2d, Statutes § 223:
If a statute grants a right or imposes a duty, it may be construed as conferring by implication the power necessary for the exercise of the right or the performance of the duty. Thus, if a statute requires an act to be done for the benefit of another, or forbids the doing of an act that may be to his injury, the person wronged may have an action even though one is not given to him under the express terms of the statute. Such a statute is generally regarded as giving rise to a liability and creating a private right of action whenever the other elements essential to a recovery are present.
The question of whether a statute grants a private right of action is to be determined from the construction of the statute. In general, a statute that does not purport to establish a civil liability, but merely makes provision to secure the safety or welfare of the public as an entity, will not be construed as establishing a civil liability. Whether a liability arising from a breach of a statutory duty accrues to the benefit of an individual thereby injured, or whether the liability is exclusively of a public character, depends on the nature of the duty imposed and the benefits to be derived from its performance. The absence of express provision for civil liability in the case of violation of a statute does not negative the existence of a legislative intent that the statute shall effect private rights.
Section 475.482, Florida Statutes (1989), Real Estate Recovery Fund, provides for the reimbursement of persons who suffer monetary losses because of the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Villazon v. Prudential Health Care Plan, Inc.
...safety or welfare of the public as an entity, will not be construed as establishing a civil liability.") (quoting Moyant v. Beattie, 561 So.2d 1319, 1320 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990)). This does not, however, preclude the right to bring a common law negligence claim based upon the same allegations. ......
-
Wilson v. Harrell
...as establishing a civil liability." Murthy v. N. Sinha Corp. , 644 So. 2d 983, 986 (Fla. 1994) (quoting Moyant v. Beattie , 561 So. 2d 1319, 1320 (Fla. 4th Dist. Ct. App. 1990) ). Likewise, Florida courts typically do not find an implied private cause of action when "the legislature has pro......
-
Chalfonte Condo. Apartment Ass'n, Inc. v. QBE Ins. Corp.
...or welfare of the public as an entity, will not be construed as establishing a civil liability.” Id. (quoting Moyant v. Beattie, 561 So.2d 1319, 1320 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990) (quoting 49 Fla. Jur. 2d, Statutes § 223(1984))). We further explained that even in the prior statute the “sole provision......
-
QBE Ins. Corp. v. Chalfonte Condo. Apartment Ass'n, Inc.
...or welfare of the public as an entity, will not be construed as establishing a civil liability.” Id. (quoting Moyant v. Beattie, 561 So.2d 1319, 1320 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990) (quoting 49 Fla. Jur.2d, Statutes § 223(1984))). We further explained that even in the prior statute the “sole provision ......