Indian River Construction Co. v. City of Jacksonville

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Indian River Construction Co. v. City of Jacksonville

350 So. 2d 1139, 1977 Fla. App. LEXIS 16834

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedOctober 24, 1977

DocketNo. DD-419

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 350 So. 2d 1139 (Indian River Construction Co. v. City of Jacksonville) 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

Indian River Construction Co. v. City of Jacksonville, 350 So. 2d 1139, 1977 Fla. App. LEXIS 16834 (Fla. Ct. App. 1977).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Having considered the record and briefs of the parties, we conclude no error occurred. Appellant’s argument that the lower court erred in directing verdict against it as to its $75,872.43 claim by reason of delay caused by eight change orders mutually agreed upon by appellant and ap-pellee is without foundation. Had appellant intended to claim more, such additional items of expense should have been included within the change orders. They were not. Having failed to do so, appellant may not now attempt to rewrite a contract properly executed. Jacksonville and A. R. Co. v. Woodworth, 26 Fla. 368, 8 So. 177 (1890).

[1140]*1140The argument raised that the lower court erred in giving an instruction to the jury was not objected to by appellant. The objection was thereby waived. Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.470(b).

AFFIRMED.

BOYER, Acting C. J., and MILLS and ERVIN, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Having considered the record and briefs of the parties, we conclude no error occurred. Appellant’s argument that the lower court erred in directing verdict against it as to its $75,872.43 claim by reason of delay caused by eight change orders mutually agreed upon by appellant and ap-pellee is without foundation. Had appellant intended to claim more, such additional items of expense should have been included within the change orders. They were not. Having failed to do so, appellant may not now attempt to rewrite a contract properly executed. Jacksonville and A. R. Co. v. Woodworth, 26 Fla. 368, 8 So. 177 (1890).

[1140]*1140The argument raised that the lower court erred in giving an instruction to the jury was not objected to by appellant. The objection was thereby waived. Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.470(b).

AFFIRMED.

BOYER, Acting C. J., and MILLS and ERVIN, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

350 So. 2d 1139, 1977 Fla. App. LEXIS 16834, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/indian-river-construction-co-v-city-of-jacksonville-fladistctapp-1977.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack