U.S. Drug Discount Corp. v. Fried-Laskey Realty Co.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

U.S. Drug Discount Corp. v. Fried-Laskey Realty Co.

483 So. 2d 459, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 326, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 6170

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedFebruary 4, 1986

DocketNo. 85-1330

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 483 So. 2d 459 (U.S. Drug Discount Corp. v. Fried-Laskey Realty 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

U.S. Drug Discount Corp. v. Fried-Laskey Realty Co., 483 So. 2d 459, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 326, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 6170 (Fla. Ct. App. 1986).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Fried-Laskey Realty commenced this action to recover a brokerage fee. By terms of a multiple listing it agreed to produce a buyer ready, willing and able to purchase business property upon terms agreeable to the seller U.S. Drug Discount Corp. A jury returned a verdict for Fried-Laskey. We reverse.

Where the uncontroverted evidence showed that the prospective purchaser made a material modification to the purchase agreement, which modification was not accepted by the seller, there was no agreement to purchase on the seller’s terms. The modified contract constituted a counteroffer, subject to acceptance by the seller. See Philbrick v. Wedel, 411 So.2d 973 (Fla.3d DCA), rev. denied, 419 So.2d 1201 (Fla.1982); Brickell Townhouse, Inc. v. Hirschfield, 404 So.2d 153 (Fla.3d DCA 1981), rev. denied, 412 So.2d 466 (Fla.1982); Mintzberg v. Golestaneh, 390 So.2d 759 (Fla.3d DCA 1980).

Further, there was no competent and substantial evidence that the prospective purchaser was ready, willing and able to buy. Mr. Wax, the broker’s witness who testified as to his readiness and ability to purchase, was not the prospective purchaser who signed the agreement. The prospective purchaser who purported to accept the sale offer by signing the contract with a modification was a Mr. Rabinowitz. Wax had only an expectant interest as a future partner of Rabinowitz. Wax’s ability and readiness to purchase was therefore irrelevant.

Reversed and remanded with directions to enter judgment for appellant.

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

PER CURIAM.

Fried-Laskey Realty commenced this action to recover a brokerage fee. By terms of a multiple listing it agreed to produce a buyer ready, willing and able to purchase business property upon terms agreeable to the seller U.S. Drug Discount Corp. A jury returned a verdict for Fried-Laskey. We reverse.

Where the uncontroverted evidence showed that the prospective purchaser made a material modification to the purchase agreement, which modification was not accepted by the seller, there was no agreement to purchase on the seller’s terms. The modified contract constituted a counteroffer, subject to acceptance by the seller. See Philbrick v. Wedel, 411 So.2d 973 (Fla.3d DCA), rev. denied, 419 So.2d 1201 (Fla.1982); Brickell Townhouse, Inc. v. Hirschfield, 404 So.2d 153 (Fla.3d DCA 1981), rev. denied, 412 So.2d 466 (Fla.1982); Mintzberg v. Golestaneh, 390 So.2d 759 (Fla.3d DCA 1980).

Further, there was no competent and substantial evidence that the prospective purchaser was ready, willing and able to buy. Mr. Wax, the broker’s witness who testified as to his readiness and ability to purchase, was not the prospective purchaser who signed the agreement. The prospective purchaser who purported to accept the sale offer by signing the contract with a modification was a Mr. Rabinowitz. Wax had only an expectant interest as a future partner of Rabinowitz. Wax’s ability and readiness to purchase was therefore irrelevant.

Reversed and remanded with directions to enter judgment for appellant.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

483 So. 2d 459, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 326, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 6170, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/us-drug-discount-corp-v-fried-laskey-realty-co-fladistctapp-1986.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack