Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Hopkins-Easton & Associates, Inc. v. Santana Properties, Inc.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided January 16, 1990No. 89-1403Published

1ConcurrenceSchwartz, Chief Judge

(specially concurring).

While I entirely agree with the result reached by the majority, I would base it upon another, perhaps simpler analysis. I think it clear that, under the unequivocal terms of its contract with the seller,1 the broker earned half of the deposit in the *72first, aborted transaction. Since there are no facts upon which a waiver of or estoppel to that claim can be constructed, Fireman’s Fund Ins. Co. v. Vogel, 195 So.2d 20 (Fla. 2d DCA 1967); 22 Fla.Jur.2d Estoppel and Waiver §§ 86-7 (1980), the vested right to recover simply remained fully in effect.. I cannot agree with the…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Fireman's Fund Insurance Company v. VogelDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1967
  2. L & N GROVE, INC. v. ChapmanDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1974

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API