Coggin Pontiac, Inc. v. Putnam Auto Sales, Inc.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Coggin Pontiac, Inc. v. Putnam Auto Sales, Inc.

324 So. 2d 141, 1975 Fla. App. LEXIS 19028

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedDecember 2, 1975

DocketNo. X-388

StatusPublished

This text of 324 So. 2d 141 (Coggin Pontiac, Inc. v. Putnam Auto Sales, Inc.) 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

Coggin Pontiac, Inc. v. Putnam Auto Sales, Inc., 324 So. 2d 141, 1975 Fla. App. LEXIS 19028 (Fla. Ct. App. 1975).

Pincite

Opinion

SMITH, Judge.

This money judgment for fraud was predicated entirely on allegations and proof that appellant Coggin, being advised that appellee Putnam suspected irregularities in a wholesaler’s purchases of cars from Cog-gin on Putnam’s credit, assured Putnam that the wholesaler’s purchases would be monitored and properly billed to Putnam. The wholesaler continued to defraud Putnam by purchases from Coggin on Putnam’s credit.

There was neither allegation nor proof that Coggin knowingly participated in or profited by the wholesaler’s fraud, nor that Coggin knowingly misrepresented any fact to induce detrimental reliance by Putnam. Coggin’s promissory representation was made in good faith. In the absence of a fiduciary obligation which was neither pleaded nor proved, Coggin’s failure or inability to prevent loss to Putnam is not actionable as fraud. Stoler v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., 287 So.2d 694 (Fla.App. 3d, 1974); Bernard Marko & Assoc., Inc. v. Steele, 230 So.2d 42 (Fla.App.3d, 1970). The trial court erred in not rendering judgment for Coggin.

Reversed.

RAWLS, Acting C. J., and MILLS, J., concur.

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

SMITH, Judge.

This money judgment for fraud was predicated entirely on allegations and proof that appellant Coggin, being advised that appellee Putnam suspected irregularities in a wholesaler’s purchases of cars from Cog-gin on Putnam’s credit, assured Putnam that the wholesaler’s purchases would be monitored and properly billed to Putnam. The wholesaler continued to defraud Putnam by purchases from Coggin on Putnam’s credit.

There was neither allegation nor proof that Coggin knowingly participated in or profited by the wholesaler’s fraud, nor that Coggin knowingly misrepresented any fact to induce detrimental reliance by Putnam. Coggin’s promissory representation was made in good faith. In the absence of a fiduciary obligation which was neither pleaded nor proved, Coggin’s failure or inability to prevent loss to Putnam is not actionable as fraud. Stoler v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., 287 So.2d 694 (Fla.App. 3d, 1974); Bernard Marko & Assoc., Inc. v. Steele, 230 So.2d 42 (Fla.App.3d, 1970). The trial court erred in not rendering judgment for Coggin.

Reversed.

RAWLS, Acting C. J., and MILLS, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

324 So. 2d 141, 1975 Fla. App. LEXIS 19028, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/coggin-pontiac-inc-v-putnam-auto-sales-inc-fladistctapp-1975.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack