Triolo v. Touchton

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Triolo v. Touchton

522 So. 2d 557, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 837, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 1217, 1988 WL 26134

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 31, 1988

DocketNo. 87-1720

StatusPublished

This text of 522 So. 2d 557 (Triolo v. Touchton) 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

Triolo v. Touchton, 522 So. 2d 557, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 837, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 1217, 1988 WL 26134 (Fla. Ct. App. 1988).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Except as modified herein, we affirm the final order granting specific performance and requiring appellants to convey to ap-pellees the time share interest involved herein but we strike from the judgment that portion thereof which requires the ap-pellees to withhold from the payment due appellants 10% of the purchase price, which sum the trial court concluded was due to Resort Condominium Resales, Inc. (Resort) as a sales commission. Resort is not a party to this action and the trial court had no jurisdiction to determine its rights just as it could not determine its obligations, if any, to the appellants.

AFFIRMED as modified.

SHARP, C.J., and ORFINGER and DANIEL, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Except as modified herein, we affirm the final order granting specific performance and requiring appellants to convey to ap-pellees the time share interest involved herein but we strike from the judgment that portion thereof which requires the ap-pellees to withhold from the payment due appellants 10% of the purchase price, which sum the trial court concluded was due to Resort Condominium Resales, Inc. (Resort) as a sales commission. Resort is not a party to this action and the trial court had no jurisdiction to determine its rights just as it could not determine its obligations, if any, to the appellants.

AFFIRMED as modified.

SHARP, C.J., and ORFINGER and DANIEL, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

522 So. 2d 557, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 837, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 1217, 1988 WL 26134, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/triolo-v-touchton-fladistctapp-1988.