B & B Florida Inc. v. First National Bank of Akron

District Court of Appeal of Florida

B & B Florida Inc. v. First National Bank of Akron

452 So. 2d 1082, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 14391

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJuly 11, 1984

DocketNo. 82-2464

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 452 So. 2d 1082 (B & B Florida Inc. v. First National Bank of Akron) 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

B & B Florida Inc. v. First National Bank of Akron, 452 So. 2d 1082, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 14391 (Fla. Ct. App. 1984).

Pincite

Opinion

SIMONS, STUART M„ Associate Judge.

This is a declaratory action seeking interpretation of a provision of a lease which provides the landlord with certain options as to cancellation of the lease in the event of fire which causes a “rebuilding” or “reconstruction” of the premises rather than a “repair.”

The appeal rests on a determination of whether the work on the building (including work to meet building code requirements) constituted “repair” or “reconstruction.” The trial court considered the evidence and determined that the work done to the building subsequent to the fire constituted “repair” of the building. In reviewing the entire record there was substantial competent evidence upon which the Court reached its decision. Thus, the final judgment for the plaintiff should not be disturbed on appeal. Oceanic International Corp. v. Lantana Boatyard, 402 So.2d 507 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981).

AFFIRMED.

HURLEY, J., concurs. DELL, J., dissents without opinion.

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

SIMONS, STUART M„ Associate Judge.

This is a declaratory action seeking interpretation of a provision of a lease which provides the landlord with certain options as to cancellation of the lease in the event of fire which causes a “rebuilding” or “reconstruction” of the premises rather than a “repair.”

The appeal rests on a determination of whether the work on the building (including work to meet building code requirements) constituted “repair” or “reconstruction.” The trial court considered the evidence and determined that the work done to the building subsequent to the fire constituted “repair” of the building. In reviewing the entire record there was substantial competent evidence upon which the Court reached its decision. Thus, the final judgment for the plaintiff should not be disturbed on appeal. Oceanic International Corp. v. Lantana Boatyard, 402 So.2d 507 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981).

AFFIRMED.

HURLEY, J., concurs. DELL, J., dissents without opinion.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

452 So. 2d 1082, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 14391, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/b-b-florida-inc-v-first-national-bank-of-akron-fladistctapp-1984.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack