Condotte/De Moya JV, LLC v. P & S Paving, Inc.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Condotte/De Moya JV, LLC v. P & S Paving, Inc.

259 So. 3d 308

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedDecember 5, 2018

DocketNo. 3D17-1310

StatusPublished

This text of 259 So. 3d 308 (Condotte/De Moya JV, LLC v. P & S Paving, 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

Condotte/De Moya JV, LLC v. P & S Paving, Inc., 259 So. 3d 308 (Fla. Ct. App. 2018).

Pincite

Opinion

LOGUE, J.

The damages sought by P & S Paving, Inc. did not arise from the termination of the subcontract agreement. Accordingly, the remedy sought by P & S was not barred by the termination provision in the subcontract agreement. See *309Bernecker v. Bernecker, 60 So.2d 399, 406 (Fla. 1952) (Concluding that the law had been erroneously applied where it was determined that "the termination of the contract, even with proper notice, terminated rights already accrued under it at the time of such termination."); Chicago Title Ins. Co. v. Title Consultants, Inc., 472 So.2d 1380, 1381 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985) ("The termination of a contract in pursuance of a provision therein, even with proper notice, does not terminate the rights already accrued under it at the time of such termination.") (citation omitted). We affirm on all other points.

Affirmed.

ANY POST-OPINION MOTION MUST BE FILED WITHIN SEVEN DAYS. A RESPONSE TO THE POST-OPINION MOTION MAY BE FILED WITHIN FIVE DAYS THEREAFTER.

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

LOGUE, J.

The damages sought by P & S Paving, Inc. did not arise from the termination of the subcontract agreement. Accordingly, the remedy sought by P & S was not barred by the termination provision in the subcontract agreement. See *309Bernecker v. Bernecker, 60 So.2d 399, 406 (Fla. 1952) (Concluding that the law had been erroneously applied where it was determined that "the termination of the contract, even with proper notice, terminated rights already accrued under it at the time of such termination."); Chicago Title Ins. Co. v. Title Consultants, Inc., 472 So.2d 1380, 1381 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985) ("The termination of a contract in pursuance of a provision therein, even with proper notice, does not terminate the rights already accrued under it at the time of such termination.") (citation omitted). We affirm on all other points.

Affirmed.

ANY POST-OPINION MOTION MUST BE FILED WITHIN SEVEN DAYS. A RESPONSE TO THE POST-OPINION MOTION MAY BE FILED WITHIN FIVE DAYS THEREAFTER.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

259 So. 3d 308, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/condottede-moya-jv-llc-v-p-s-paving-inc-fladistctapp-2018.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack