Cas-Kay Enterprises v. SNAPPER CREEK

453 So. 2d 1147, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 14082
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedJuly 10, 1984
Docket83-2666
StatusPublished
Cited by7 cases

This text of 453 So. 2d 1147 (Cas-Kay Enterprises v. SNAPPER CREEK) 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
Cas-Kay Enterprises v. SNAPPER CREEK, 453 So. 2d 1147, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 14082 (Fla. Ct. App. 1984).

Opinion

453 So.2d 1147 (1984)

CAS-KAY ENTERPRISES, INC., Appellant,
v.
SNAPPER CREEK TRADING CENTER, INC., Appellee.

No. 83-2666.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

July 10, 1984.
Rehearing Denied August 22, 1984.

Robert T. Mann, Gainesville, for appellant.

*1148 Wallace, Engels, Pertnoy & Solowsky and Sidney M. Pertnoy, Miami, for appellee.

Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and DANIEL S. PEARSON and JORGENSON, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

We reverse the order dismissing the appellant's action to rescind its purchase of real property from the appellee and the summary final judgment entered in favor of appellee in its action to foreclose the purchase money mortgage given by the appellant to secure the balance of the purchase price of such sale of real property upon a holding that (1) the "integration" clause of the contract for sale stating that "no prior or present agreements or representations shall be binding upon any of the parties hereto unless incorporated in this contract" does not make the contract incontestable where, as here, the appellant based its action to rescind and its affirmative defense to the foreclosure action on the grounds that the contract was procured by fraud, compare Oceanic Villas, Inc. v. Godson, 148 Fla. 454, 4 So.2d 689 (1941) (action to rescind based on fraud in procurement survives integration clause), with Cassara v. Bowman, 136 Fla. 302, 186 So. 514 (1939) (action to rescind not based on fraud in procurement does not survive integration clause); and (2) since it does not appear from the pleadings or otherwise that the appellant knew that the alleged misrepresentations were false, or that they were obviously false, the mere fact that their falsity could have been ascertained through investigation did not prevent the appellant from relying on such alleged misrepresentations, Besett v. Basnett, 389 So.2d 995 (Fla. 1980); Gold v. Wolkowitz, 430 So.2d 556 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); North Miami General Hospital v. Royal Palm Beach Colony, Inc., 397 So.2d 1033 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981).

Reversed and remanded for further proceedings.

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

Related

Billington v. Ginn-LA Pine Island, Ltd.
192 So. 3d 77 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2016)
Mejia v. Jurich
781 So. 2d 1175 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2001)
Acquisition Corp. of America v. Federal Deposit Insurance
760 F. Supp. 1558 (S.D. Florida, 1991)
Ortiz v. Orchid Springs Dev. Corp.
504 So. 2d 510 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1987)
Nagelbush v. United Postal Savings Ass'n
504 So. 2d 782 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1987)
Nobles v. Citizens Mortgage Corp.
479 So. 2d 822 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1985)
Weiss v. Cherry
477 So. 2d 12 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1985)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
453 So. 2d 1147, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 14082, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cas-kay-enterprises-v-snapper-creek-fladistctapp-1984.