National Industrial Bank of Miami v. Forbes

District Court of Appeal of Florida

National Industrial Bank of Miami v. Forbes

270 So. 2d 426, 1972 Fla. App. LEXIS 5779

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedDecember 19, 1972

DocketNo. 72-381

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 270 So. 2d 426 (National Industrial Bank of Miami v. Forbes) 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

National Industrial Bank of Miami v. Forbes, 270 So. 2d 426, 1972 Fla. App. LEXIS 5779 (Fla. Ct. App. 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We have reviewed the briefs and record on appeal and heard oral argument. On the basis thereof, we are of the opinion that no reversible error has been made to clearly appear. The final judgment finding for the defendants is affirmed except to the extent as hereinafter modified. Inasmuch as the record reflects that the real property which was the res of the action for specific performance was conveyed to a third party, this cause is remanded to the trial court for a determination as to whether a decree of [427]*427specific performance can be rendered in light of such conveyance. 29A Fla.Jur. Specific Performance § 51. Should the trial court find that it is impossible to grant the equitable relief requested then in that event the trial court shall be authorized to conduct an evidentiary hearing for the purpose of ascertaining and awarding damages incidental to the main relief sought. See Miller v. Rolfe, Fla.App.1957, 97 So.2d 132.

Affirmed, as modified and remanded with instructions.

WALDEN, CROSS and MAGER, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

We have reviewed the briefs and record on appeal and heard oral argument. On the basis thereof, we are of the opinion that no reversible error has been made to clearly appear. The final judgment finding for the defendants is affirmed except to the extent as hereinafter modified. Inasmuch as the record reflects that the real property which was the res of the action for specific performance was conveyed to a third party, this cause is remanded to the trial court for a determination as to whether a decree of [427]*427specific performance can be rendered in light of such conveyance. 29A Fla.Jur. Specific Performance § 51. Should the trial court find that it is impossible to grant the equitable relief requested then in that event the trial court shall be authorized to conduct an evidentiary hearing for the purpose of ascertaining and awarding damages incidental to the main relief sought. See Miller v. Rolfe, Fla.App.1957, 97 So.2d 132.

Affirmed, as modified and remanded with instructions.

WALDEN, CROSS and MAGER, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

270 So. 2d 426, 1972 Fla. App. LEXIS 5779, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/national-industrial-bank-of-miami-v-forbes-fladistctapp-1972.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack