Ferrari v. Birdsong

330 So. 2d 204, 1976 Fla. App. LEXIS 14972
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided April 13, 1976·No. No. 75-824·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Anthony Ferrari and his wife sued Charles Birdsong and his wife on a written agreement of the Birdsong’s to hold the Ferraris harmless on a claim for a real estate brokerage commission. The Birdsongs answered claiming that the agreement was void as being without consideration because it was exacted by the Ferraris as a condition for the performance of the contract to buy the real property after the terms of the purchase were fully determined by written contract but not fully performed by the Ferraris. After a trial before the court without jury, judgment was entered for the Birdsongs and this appeal followed.

We affirm upon authority of the holding in F. L. Stitt & Co. v. Powell, 94 Fla. 550, 114 So. 375 (1927). See also 17 Am.Jur.2d Contracts § 461; and Spann v. Baltzell, 1 Fla. 301, 46 Am.Dec. 346 (1847).

Affirmed.

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

Ferrari v. Birdsong, 330 So. 2d 204, 1976 Fla. App. LEXIS 14972 (Fla. Ct. App. 1976).

330 So. 2d 204 (Ferrari v. Birdsong) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

F. L. Stitt Co., a Corp. v. Powell
114 So. 375 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1927)
Spann v. Baltzell
1 Fla. 301 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1847)