Whatley Equipment Co. v. Duster

Because no competent evidence supports the jury’s award of damages, I would reverse. Appellee’s claim was predicated upon breach of contract and deceptive trade practices culminating in the delivery of a defective motor home. He asserted that he received a demonstrator rather than a new home. In order to prevail, appellee was required to establish the value of the motor home called for in the contract on the date of the breach and to deduct the value of the home that was actually delivered. Srybnik *540v. Ice Tower, Inc., 162 So.2d 294 (Fla. 3d DCA 1964). Instead, however, appellee testified to…