Legal Opinion

Pointe Savings Bank v. Garshall

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided December 23, 1992No. Nos. 91-2205, 92-0136 and 92-0137PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Per curiam

The trial court found as a fact that under the terms of their commission agreement, the appellee-mortgage broker was only entitled to a commission from appellant if the loan applications that she originated were actually closed. Nevertheless, the trial court ordered the bank to pay commissions on loan applications which did not close. This was error, notwithstanding that only the bank was responsible for the decisions to reject those applications prior to closing on them. E.g. Harding Realty Inc. v. Turnberry Towers Corp., 436 So.2d 983 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); Warter v. Bancroft Hotel Assocs.,…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. HARDING RLTY., INC. v. Turnberry Towers Corp.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1983
  2. Hanover Realty Corp. v. CodomoSupreme Court of Florida · 1957
  3. Warter v. Bancroft Hotel AssociatesDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1973

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Strickland v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1992
  2. Scott v. SimpsonDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2001

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

Powered by the Exa API