From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Gonzalez v. Patane

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Apr 14, 1970
234 So. 2d 8 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1970)

Summary

finding no cause of action for misrepresentation where the purchasers failed to exercise diligence to discover readily available information

Summary of this case from Addison v. Carballosa

Opinion

No. 69-767.

April 14, 1970.

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Dade County, Milton A. Friedman, J.

Spiegelman Spiegelman, and David Moliver, Miami, for appellants.

Sheldon R. Rosenthal, Miami, for appellees.

Before PEARSON, C.J., and HENDRY and SWANN, JJ.


The plaintiff-appellants were the contract purchasers in a deposit receipt contract. They refused to complete the purchase upon the ground that the real estate broker had misrepresented the amount of yearly taxes assessed against the property. They brought the instant suit against the sellers and the broker seeking rescission of the contract and return of their deposit. After discovery the trial court entered summary judgment for the appellee owners and the appellee broker. We affirm.

The facts as presented to the trial court were that appellants prior to the signing of the contract made an inquiry of the broker as to the amount of the taxes on the property. He submitted an estimate showing the taxes to be between $650 and $680 per year. The proposed closing statement presented to appellants showed the taxes as $981.01. Appellants made no inquiry of the owners nor did they check the records or ask to see a tax receipt. The affidavits and discovery on file demonstrate that there was no fraud or deceit. The appellants failed to use even the slightest diligence to determine the amount of the taxes when the information was readily available. We therefore hold that the trial court correctly entered a summary judgment for the appellees. See Greenberg v. Berger, Fla. 1950, 46 So.2d 609.

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Gonzalez v. Patane

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Apr 14, 1970
234 So. 2d 8 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1970)

finding no cause of action for misrepresentation where the purchasers failed to exercise diligence to discover readily available information

Summary of this case from Addison v. Carballosa

upholding summary judgment against property purchasers seeking rescission of contract where purchasers relied on real estate broker's incorrect estimate of property taxes and “failed to use even the slightest diligence to determine the amount of the taxes when the information was readily available”

Summary of this case from Thomas J. Duggan, LLC v. Peacock Point, LLC
Case details for

Gonzalez v. Patane

Case Details

Full title:LUIS A. GONZALEZ AND MARIA A. GONZALEZ, HIS WIFE, APPELLANTS, v. ANGELO M…

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District

Date published: Apr 14, 1970

Citations

234 So. 2d 8 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1970)

Citing Cases

Addison v. Carballosa

In addressing the justifiable reliance element of a fraudulent inducement claim in Mil Schottenstein, the…

Zelman v. Cook

Ramel v. Chasebrook Constr. Co., 135 So.2d 876 (Fla. 2d DCA 1961). See Gonzalez v. Patane, 234 So.2d 8 (Fla.…