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

324 So. 2d 141, 1975 Fla. App. LEXIS 19028
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Coggin Pontiac, Inc. v. Putnam Auto Sales, Inc.. Read the opinion of the Court — 278 So. 2d 647
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided December 2, 1975·No. No. X-388·Published

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

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

324 So. 2d 141 (Coggin Pontiac, Inc. v. Putnam Auto Sales, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Stoler v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co.
287 So. 2d 694 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1974)
Bernard Marko & Associates, Inc. v. Steele
230 So. 2d 42 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1970)