Gissendaner v. Rich

365 So. 2d 454, 1978 Fla. App. LEXIS 17003
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedDecember 22, 1978
DocketNo. JJ-452
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 365 So. 2d 454 (Gissendaner v. Rich) 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
Gissendaner v. Rich, 365 So. 2d 454, 1978 Fla. App. LEXIS 17003 (Fla. Ct. App. 1978).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant claims the trial court erred in denying his foreclosure suit against appel-lee’s home. The record reveals that appel-lees’ decedent had granted a mortgage on the home as security for a retail installment sales agreement she signed in connection with a home improvement contract. The trial court denied the complaint in part because the home improvement contractor had failed to obtain a signed completion certificate for the repairs, which is required by “The Home Improvement Sales and Finance Act”, Section 520.60 et seq., Florida Statutes (1977). We affirm on that ground. Section 520.81(1) clearly states that the contractor “shall prepare a certificate which shall be signed by both parties.” Accordingly, the judgment is AFFIRMED.

McCORD, C. J., and ERVIN and MELVIN, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Atlantic Coast Employees Trust Fund v. Norton
467 So. 2d 496 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1985)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
365 So. 2d 454, 1978 Fla. App. LEXIS 17003, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gissendaner-v-rich-fladistctapp-1978.