Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1103 y y• 50613 IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF, THE NINETEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA CASE NO. 80-302 CA KAZIMIERZ BILINSKI and HELENA BILINSKI, his wife, Plaintiffs, vs. ROBERT VAN NATTA and ELLEN VAN NATTA, his wife, Defendants. ORDER TNIS CAUSE came on to be heard upon the Motion filed by the Plaintiff requesting the Court to enter an Order requiring the Defendant ROBERT VAN NATTA to deposit the $10,000.00 placed down as earnest money by the Plaintiffs to bind the contract for sale and purchase between the parties herein in the registry of the Court, and the Court having heard and considered testimony of certain of the parties, and argument of respective counsel, and being fully advised, finds as follows: The Court finds that the contract for sale and purchase Paragraph II(a), the words "In Trust", which were X'd out, were E not initialed by the parties, and at the bottom of the contract ` immediately below Defendant Robert A. Van Natta's signature, the " " words escrow agent which were lined out, were not initialed by the parties; and that, because of the fiduciary relationship ~ implied by being a Real Estate Broker and an Attorney at law, the defendant, Robert A. Van Natta, had a duty to clearly disclose to the plaintiff that the $10,000.00 deposit was to be used in the construction of his new home which clause should have been inserted in the contract for sale and purchase. Accordin 1 it is g y• k ORDERED AND A1~7UDGE[~ as follows F 1. The Defendant, ROBERT A. VAN NATTA, shall either deposit B0~ PAGE i _