Radiology Consultants of Palm Beach, Inc. v. X-Ray Equipment Co.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Radiology Consultants of Palm Beach, Inc. v. X-Ray Equipment Co.

844 So. 2d 648, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 18141, 2002 WL 31757824

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedDecember 11, 2002

DocketNo. 4D02-949

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 844 So. 2d 648 (Radiology Consultants of Palm Beach, Inc. v. X-Ray Equipment Co.) 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

Radiology Consultants of Palm Beach, Inc. v. X-Ray Equipment Co., 844 So. 2d 648, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 18141, 2002 WL 31757824 (Fla. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

STERN, KENNETH D„ Associate Judge.

We affirm the Final Judgment rendered in favor of appellee, X-Ray Equipment Co., Inc. in all respects but one: the calculation of the monetary award. We remand this cause with directions to the trial court to enter a revised Final Judgment amending the monetary award in at least two respects: First, as the record clearly indicates that the CT scan machine was not included in the contract at issue, the $19,500.00 in lost profit attributable to the prospective sale should be deducted from the award. Second, the amount of cost for the two fluoro rooms should have been $24,000.00, not $12,000.00. Accordingly, the trial court shall recalculate the monetary award, and make the appropriate adjustments thereto.

AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART AND REMANDED.

STONE and GROSS, JJ., concur.

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

STERN, KENNETH D„ Associate Judge.

We affirm the Final Judgment rendered in favor of appellee, X-Ray Equipment Co., Inc. in all respects but one: the calculation of the monetary award. We remand this cause with directions to the trial court to enter a revised Final Judgment amending the monetary award in at least two respects: First, as the record clearly indicates that the CT scan machine was not included in the contract at issue, the $19,500.00 in lost profit attributable to the prospective sale should be deducted from the award. Second, the amount of cost for the two fluoro rooms should have been $24,000.00, not $12,000.00. Accordingly, the trial court shall recalculate the monetary award, and make the appropriate adjustments thereto.

AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART AND REMANDED.

STONE and GROSS, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

844 So. 2d 648, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 18141, 2002 WL 31757824, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/radiology-consultants-of-palm-beach-inc-v-x-ray-equipment-co-fladistctapp-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack