Regents Park v. Kai Properties
This text of Regents Park v. Kai Properties (Regents Park v. Kai Properties) 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.
Opinion
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida
Opinion filed November 5, 2014. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________
No. 3D14-1511 Lower Tribunal No. 13-39670 ________________
Regents Park Investments, LLC., a Florida Limited Liability Company, Appellant,
vs.
KAI Properties, LTD, a Florida Limited Partnership, Appellee.
An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Ronald Dresnick, Judge.
Arnaldo Velez, for appellant.
Duane Morris, Lida Rodriguez-Taseff, Nicole L. Levy and Charles C. Papy, III; Joel S. Perwin, for appellee.
Before WELLS, EMAS and LOGUE, JJ.
WELLS, Judge. Contract purchaser Regents Park Investments, LLC, appeals from a final
summary judgment following dismissal of its single-count complaint for specific
performance of a real estate sales transaction. Because the default provision
detailed in the contract for purchase and sale does not limit the remedies available
to the purchaser in the event of a default by the seller, the court below erred in
concluding that an action for specific performance could not be asserted. See
Coastal Computer Corp. v. Team Mgmt. Sys., Inc., 624 So. 2d 352, 352-53 (Fla.
2d DCA 1993) (finding that the appellant could “pursue any remedy that the law
affords” where the parties’ contract set out one remedy for its breach, but did not
also provide that this was an exclusive remedy); Dillard Homes, Inc. v. Carroll,
152 So. 2d 738, 739 (Fla. 3d DCA 1963) (confirming that where contract language
“discloses that the parties intended to limit [a non-breaching party’s] remedy in the
event” of default, remedies other than that provided in the contract, to include
specific performance, are precluded).
Accordingly, the judgment entered below is reversed and this matter
remanded for further proceedings.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Regents Park v. Kai Properties, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/regents-park-v-kai-properties-fladistctapp-2014.