Master Antenna Systems, Inc. v. Number One Condominium Ass'n

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Master Antenna Systems, Inc. v. Number One Condominium Ass'n

466 So. 2d 426, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 863, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 13282

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedApril 3, 1985

DocketNo. 84-1838

StatusPublished

This text of 466 So. 2d 426 (Master Antenna Systems, Inc. v. Number One Condominium Ass'n) 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

Master Antenna Systems, Inc. v. Number One Condominium Ass'n, 466 So. 2d 426, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 863, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 13282 (Fla. Ct. App. 1985).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We find the original master television system contract between the owner and contractor to be ambiguous enough to preclude summary judgment in favor of either party. Accordingly, we reverse and remand the final summary judgment. Given such ambiguity, we also reverse and remand dismissal of Count II of the contractor’s complaint. On remand we direct the trial court to consider the issue of mootness as to standing of the contractor to raise post-two year damages which question matured, if at all, after entry of the final summary judgment which we reverse. Such mootness, if established, will not affect any claim of the contractor for damages accruing prior to the expiration of the two year period described in the subsequent agreement of sale to which the contractor was a party.

HERSEY, GLICKSTEIN and WALDEN, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

We find the original master television system contract between the owner and contractor to be ambiguous enough to preclude summary judgment in favor of either party. Accordingly, we reverse and remand the final summary judgment. Given such ambiguity, we also reverse and remand dismissal of Count II of the contractor’s complaint. On remand we direct the trial court to consider the issue of mootness as to standing of the contractor to raise post-two year damages which question matured, if at all, after entry of the final summary judgment which we reverse. Such mootness, if established, will not affect any claim of the contractor for damages accruing prior to the expiration of the two year period described in the subsequent agreement of sale to which the contractor was a party.

HERSEY, GLICKSTEIN and WALDEN, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

466 So. 2d 426, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 863, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 13282, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/master-antenna-systems-inc-v-number-one-condominium-assn-fladistctapp-1985.