Gareth S. Gelinas v. Accelerated Benefits Corp.
This text of 139 F. App'x 237 (Gareth S. Gelinas v. Accelerated Benefits Corp.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Plaintiffs appeal the judgment of the district court awarding attorneys’ fees in favor of Defendant, American Title Co. Of Orlando (“ATCO”). Plaintiffs do not challenge the district court’s finding that they were third-party beneficiaries of the Trust Agreement and Escrow and Closing Agreements between ATCO and Accelerated Benefits Corp. In fact, Plaintiffs proceeded on that theory below. As a third-party beneficiary of those agreements, Plaintiffs are subject to all the equities and defenses that would be available against the promisee. See Zac Smith & Co. v. Moonspinner Condo. Ass’n, 472 So.2d 1324, 1324 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1985) (“A third-party beneficiary’s rights depend upon, and are measured by, the terms of the contract between the promisor and the promisee.”); see also 17A Am.Jur.2d Contracts § 449 (2004). We therefore conclude that it was not error for the district court to award ATCO attorneys’ fees on the ground that Plaintiffs were liable for such fees pursuant to the fee-shifting provision found in the Escrow Agreement.
AFFIRMED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
139 F. App'x 237, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gareth-s-gelinas-v-accelerated-benefits-corp-ca11-2005.