Earl A. Hollis, Inc. v. Haas

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Earl A. Hollis, Inc. v. Haas

489 So. 2d 34, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 292

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided January 29, 1986·No. Nos. 84-2034, 84-2078, 84-2211, 84-2376 and 85-83·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the jury s award to the broker in this case of $470,000 and the trial court’s addition of prejudgment interest. The record supports the award based on implied contract. Danieli Corporation v. Bryant, 399 So.2d 387 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981); Kerdyk v. Hammock Oaks Estates, Inc., 342 So.2d 833 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977). We also affirm the trial court’s direction of a verdict in favor of the seller’s agent on the broker’s claim of tortious interference with an advantageous business relationship. West v. Troelstrup, 367 So.2d 253 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979).

ANSTEAD and GLICKSTEIN, JJ., and GODERICH, MARIO P., Associate Judge, concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the jury s award to the broker in this case of $470,000 and the trial court’s addition of prejudgment interest. The record supports the award based on implied contract. Danieli Corporation v. Bryant, 399 So.2d 387 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981); Kerdyk v. Hammock Oaks Estates, Inc., 342 So.2d 833 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977). We also affirm the trial court’s direction of a verdict in favor of the seller’s agent on the broker’s claim of tortious interference with an advantageous business relationship. West v. Troelstrup, 367 So.2d 253 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979).

ANSTEAD and GLICKSTEIN, JJ., and GODERICH, MARIO P., Associate Judge, concur.

Earl A. Hollis, Inc. v. Haas, 489 So. 2d 34, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 292 (Fla. Ct. App. 1986).

Pincite

489 So. 2d 34 (Earl A. Hollis, Inc. v. Haas) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related