Excavators, Inc. v. Smith Mining, Inc.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Excavators, Inc. v. Smith Mining, Inc.

651 So. 2d 1321, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 3478, 1995 WL 144236

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided April 5, 1995·No. No. 93-3716·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We reverse the final judgment and remand to recompute the amount owed. Though we agree with the trial court that no default rate could apply to the balance due under the note prior to acceleration, here the date Appellant filed suit on the note, we hold it was error not to award Appellant 18% interest, in accordance with the specific terms of the Appellees’ agreement, on deferred interest from the date that the interest was past due and unpaid, July 15, 1989, through the date suit was filed. See Breitbart v. Zaucha, 185 So.2d 496 (Fla. 3d DCA 1966). We find no error as to the balance of the final judgment.

STONE, POLEN and KLEIN, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

We reverse the final judgment and remand to recompute the amount owed. Though we agree with the trial court that no default rate could apply to the balance due under the note prior to acceleration, here the date Appellant filed suit on the note, we hold it was error not to award Appellant 18% interest, in accordance with the specific terms of the Appellees’ agreement, on deferred interest from the date that the interest was past due and unpaid, July 15, 1989, through the date suit was filed. See Breitbart v. Zaucha, 185 So.2d 496 (Fla. 3d DCA 1966). We find no error as to the balance of the final judgment.

STONE, POLEN and KLEIN, JJ., concur.

Excavators, Inc. v. Smith Mining, Inc., 651 So. 2d 1321, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 3478, 1995 WL 144236 (Fla. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

651 So. 2d 1321 (Excavators, Inc. v. Smith Mining, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related