Presley v. Szerdi

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Presley v. Szerdi

708 So. 2d 335, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 3624, 1998 WL 158839

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedApril 8, 1998

DocketNos. 97-1777, 97-1867

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 708 So. 2d 335 (Presley v. Szerdi) 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

Presley v. Szerdi, 708 So. 2d 335, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 3624, 1998 WL 158839 (Fla. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the May 7 and May 15, 1997 orders which compel arbitration. Based on the record before it, the trial court properly determined that there was no fraud pertaining to the inclusion of .the arbitration clause in the Standard Form of Agreement Between Owner and Architect. See Passerrello v. Robert L. Lipton, Inc., 690 So.2d 610 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997); Ronbeck Constr. Co. v. Savanna Club Corp., 592 So.2d 344, 347 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992). Appellants’ theory of mutual mistake as a basis for rescission was not raised below and therefore cannot be raised on appeal. See Kozich v. Hartford Ins. Co., 609 So.2d 147, 148 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992). The slander of title and fraudulent hen claims were “[c]laims, disputes or other matters in question” that arose out of or “related to” the written contract between the parties. See Advantage Dental Health Plans Inc. v. Beneficial Adm’rs Inc., 683 So.2d 1133, 1134 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996); Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd. v. Universal Employment Agency, 664 So.2d 1107 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995). Appellees’ filing of a counterclaim to foreclose its hen did not constitute a waiver of its right to arbitrate. See McDaniel v. Berhalter, 405 So.2d 1027 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981); Concrete Design Structures, Inc. v. P.L. Dodge Found., Inc., 532 So.2d 1334 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988).

AFFIRMED.

GUNTHER, SHAHOOD and GROSS, JJ„ concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the May 7 and May 15, 1997 orders which compel arbitration. Based on the record before it, the trial court properly determined that there was no fraud pertaining to the inclusion of .the arbitration clause in the Standard Form of Agreement Between Owner and Architect. See Passerrello v. Robert L. Lipton, Inc., 690 So.2d 610 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997); Ronbeck Constr. Co. v. Savanna Club Corp., 592 So.2d 344, 347 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992). Appellants’ theory of mutual mistake as a basis for rescission was not raised below and therefore cannot be raised on appeal. See Kozich v. Hartford Ins. Co., 609 So.2d 147, 148 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992). The slander of title and fraudulent hen claims were “[c]laims, disputes or other matters in question” that arose out of or “related to” the written contract between the parties. See Advantage Dental Health Plans Inc. v. Beneficial Adm’rs Inc., 683 So.2d 1133, 1134 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996); Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd. v. Universal Employment Agency, 664 So.2d 1107 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995). Appellees’ filing of a counterclaim to foreclose its hen did not constitute a waiver of its right to arbitrate. See McDaniel v. Berhalter, 405 So.2d 1027 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981); Concrete Design Structures, Inc. v. P.L. Dodge Found., Inc., 532 So.2d 1334 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988).

AFFIRMED.

GUNTHER, SHAHOOD and GROSS, JJ„ concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

708 So. 2d 335, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 3624, 1998 WL 158839, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/presley-v-szerdi-fladistctapp-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack