American Enviro-Port, Inc. v. Williams

District Court of Appeal of Florida

American Enviro-Port, Inc. v. Williams

489 So. 2d 839, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 1263, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 8238

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJune 4, 1986

DocketNo. BH-253

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 489 So. 2d 839 (American Enviro-Port, Inc. v. Williams) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

American Enviro-Port, Inc. v. Williams, 489 So. 2d 839, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 1263, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 8238 (Fla. Ct. App. 1986).

Pincite

Opinion

BARFIELD, Judge.

The trial court entered judgment for appellee, John L. Williams, on a finding that appellant, American Enviro-Port, Inc., had abandoned its contract with appellee. Abandonment of contract is an affirmative defense that the defendant must raise in its answer, or otherwise it is waived. Appel-lee did not raise abandonment as a defense in its answer, and appellant consistently objected to the trial of that issue throughout the proceedings below. Therefore, the trial court’s judgment is in error to the extent it is predicated on abandonment of contract.

The record suggests, and appellee argues that the trial judge intended to rule, that appellant failed to prove its performance under its contract at trial. While that determination may be made by the trial judge, it has not been made in the final judgment before this court.

The judgment of the trial court is REVERSED and REMANDED for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

SHIVERS and ZEHMER, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

BARFIELD, Judge.

The trial court entered judgment for appellee, John L. Williams, on a finding that appellant, American Enviro-Port, Inc., had abandoned its contract with appellee. Abandonment of contract is an affirmative defense that the defendant must raise in its answer, or otherwise it is waived. Appel-lee did not raise abandonment as a defense in its answer, and appellant consistently objected to the trial of that issue throughout the proceedings below. Therefore, the trial court’s judgment is in error to the extent it is predicated on abandonment of contract.

The record suggests, and appellee argues that the trial judge intended to rule, that appellant failed to prove its performance under its contract at trial. While that determination may be made by the trial judge, it has not been made in the final judgment before this court.

The judgment of the trial court is REVERSED and REMANDED for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

SHIVERS and ZEHMER, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

489 So. 2d 839, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 1263, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 8238, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/american-enviro-port-inc-v-williams-fladistctapp-1986.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack