HomeMy WebLinkAbout2964 DAUKSCH, J., dissenting:
I respectfully-dissent. In this contract case the trial court
.found for the defendant. In my opinion the pleadings and discovery
themselves are enough to substantiate a judgment against those defendants.
There was an offer to lease a sign, in writing, for a specified amount
and a particular design. The signmaker received a deposit from the
offeror and forwarded it to the leasing company and began his efforts
toward constructing 3 he sign. That is a unilateral contract, in my
opinion, and is enforceable. In their answer to the complaint the -
defendants admitted they entered into a contract with .the plaintiff but
allege, as an affirmative defense they say, that they told the plaintiff
.•:N
to "correct and amend the proposed sketch of the sign:' and that "the
plaintiff did prepare an amended sketch of a proposed sign for approval
by the defendants r~hich said defendants refused to approve due to the
plaintiff's failure to correct the design to meet the requests of the
plaintiffs." They went on to allege this caused a "failure of
consideration." I would hold the defendants to their admission of the
contract in. their answer and in their answers to requests for admissions,
I
~'i and I find quite sufficient evidence of a contract to build and lease
a sign. The contract is supported by consideration and work began in
reliance upon the contract, as further consideration. Just because they
t
changed their minds does not and should not relieve the plaintiffs of
[heir promise to pay. I would reverse.
i
}
3 i
i
i
t
i
i
e
~'~.ca AS~D RECOROEO
• ::~C~E CGUNTY, FLA, i
,1 438973 1
9~4Z9ANii:29 _
~
~t~??:Eta Fc1i"~ p; I i
CLERK C~FCC~IT CGLRT. I
f ~
. t a ~ BOCX 305 ~A~F2958
_ - - - r - -