Pappas v. Weinro Management, Ltd.
Opinion
Appellants conveyed a certain parcel of land, with improvements, to appellee, Wein-ro Management, Ltd. Upon learning that the improvements encroached on an adjacent parcel of land, Weinro filed suit against appellants seeking damages, apparently upon a theory of misrepresentation.1 Appellants now seek review of the final judgment for damages entered against them after a non-jury trial. We reverse.
The only evidence offered in an attempt to establish appellee’s damages was the sum of $17,500, which appellee paid to the adjacent property owner for a strip of land which not only included the area encroached upon, but additional footage as well. There was no competent evidence that that sum represented the proper measure of damages or that the sum paid was a reasonable one as a result of the encroachment. See Port Everglades Authority v. R. S. C. Industries, Inc., 351 So.2d 1148 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976).
The final judgment is reversed with directions to enter judgment for the defendants, appellants.
Footnotes
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
373 So. 2d 411 (Pappas v. Weinro Management, Ltd.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.