Legal Opinion

Earl A. Hollis, Inc. v. Haas

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided January 29, 1986No. Nos. 84-2034, 84-2078, 84-2211, 84-2376 and 85-83PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Per curiam

We affirm the jury s award to the broker in this case of $470,000 and the trial court’s addition of prejudgment interest. The record supports the award based on implied contract. Danieli Corporation v. Bryant, 399 So.2d 387 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981); Kerdyk v. Hammock Oaks Estates, Inc., 342 So.2d 833 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977). We also affirm the trial court’s direction of a verdict in favor of the seller’s agent on the broker’s claim of tortious interference with an advantageous business relationship. West v. Troelstrup, 367 So.2d 253 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979).

ANSTEAD and GLICKSTEIN, JJ., and GODERICH, MARIO…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. West v. TroelstrupDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1979
  2. Kerdyk v. Hammock Oaks Estates, Inc.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1977
  3. Danieli Corp. v. BryantDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1981

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Richard Bertram, Inc. v. Sterling Bank & TrustDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2002

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

Powered by the Exa API