Simon v. Florida Memorial College

498 So. 2d 459, 36 Educ. L. Rep. 522, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 1692, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 9240
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedAugust 5, 1986
DocketNo. 85-2467
StatusPublished

This text of 498 So. 2d 459 (Simon v. Florida Memorial College) 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
Simon v. Florida Memorial College, 498 So. 2d 459, 36 Educ. L. Rep. 522, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 1692, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 9240 (Fla. Ct. App. 1986).

Opinion

BASKIN, Judge.

Dorothy Simon challenges an adverse summary final judgment on the ground that the trial court erred in ruling that, as a matter of law, she was not entitled to recover damages from her tenant, Florida Memorial College [College], for the College’s alleged breach of its lease. We affirm.

On August 18, 1981, the College and Dorothy Simon entered into a written lease specifically providing that the College use the premises as a “school and for no other purpose or uses whatsoever _” Approximately seven months later, governmental authorities cited the premises for various fire, safety, building, and zoning code violations. The existence of the violations rendered the premises unfit for use as a school. When Dorothy Simon failed to correct the violations, the College vacated the premises.

Subsequently, Dorothy Simon brought an action against the College for non-payment of rent; the College counterclaimed for rescission of the lease and damages. Both parties moved for summary judgment, and the trial court entered a summary final judgment in favor of the College. We affirm on the controlling authority of Edmanuel, Inc. v. Jones Shutter Products, Inc., 184 So.2d 224 (Fla. 3d DCA 1966), which holds that a lessee is entitled to relief when a governmental agency declares premises leased for a specific purpose unfit for that use. See Christopher v. Charles Blum Co., 78 Fla. 240, 82 So. 765 (1919); see generally Annot., 22 A.L. R.3d 521 §§ 5, 7[a], 10[a] (1968). Appellant’s remaining point lacks merit.

Affirmed.

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

Related

Christopher v. Charles Blum Co.
82 So. 765 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1919)
Edmanuel, Inc. v. Jones Shutter Products, Inc.
184 So. 2d 224 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1966)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
498 So. 2d 459, 36 Educ. L. Rep. 522, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 1692, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 9240, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/simon-v-florida-memorial-college-fladistctapp-1986.