State, Department of Corrections v. Brooks

District Court of Appeal of Florida

State, Department of Corrections v. Brooks

891 So. 2d 1, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 11416, 2004 WL 1736993

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedAugust 4, 2004

DocketNo. 1D03-3786

StatusPublished

This text of 891 So. 2d 1 (State, Department of Corrections v. Brooks) 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

State, Department of Corrections v. Brooks, 891 So. 2d 1, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 11416, 2004 WL 1736993 (Fla. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinions

PER CURIAM.

In this lease dispute between the Florida Department of Corrections and its former landlord, appellee Mr. Brooks, the trial court found in favor of appellee and awarded damages. On appeal, the Department raises numerous points, and on cross appeal, Mr. Brooks raises one point. The Department’s second point, whether the court's judgment in favor of Mr. Brooks was supported by the evidence, is disposi-tive and we do not reach any of the other points.

Viewed in a light most favorable to ap-pellee, the evidence does not support the trial court’s finding that the Department “is estopped” from asserting that certain problems (including a rat infestation) rendered the premises untenantable during the period of the renewed lease. Because the judgment under review also finds that, absent the trial court’s finding of estoppel, the rat infestation alone would have caused the leased building to be untenantable, we conclude that the Department’s defense to appellee’s claim for damages resulting from a breached lease must prevail.

REVERSED and REMANDED with instructions that judgment be entered in favor of the State of Florida, Department of Corrections.

WOLF, C.J., KAHN, and LEWIS, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

In this lease dispute between the Florida Department of Corrections and its former landlord, appellee Mr. Brooks, the trial court found in favor of appellee and awarded damages. On appeal, the Department raises numerous points, and on cross appeal, Mr. Brooks raises one point. The Department’s second point, whether the court's judgment in favor of Mr. Brooks was supported by the evidence, is disposi-tive and we do not reach any of the other points.

Viewed in a light most favorable to ap-pellee, the evidence does not support the trial court’s finding that the Department “is estopped” from asserting that certain problems (including a rat infestation) rendered the premises untenantable during the period of the renewed lease. Because the judgment under review also finds that, absent the trial court’s finding of estoppel, the rat infestation alone would have caused the leased building to be untenantable, we conclude that the Department’s defense to appellee’s claim for damages resulting from a breached lease must prevail.

REVERSED and REMANDED with instructions that judgment be entered in favor of the State of Florida, Department of Corrections.

WOLF, C.J., KAHN, and LEWIS, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

891 So. 2d 1, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 11416, 2004 WL 1736993, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-department-of-corrections-v-brooks-fladistctapp-2004.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack