Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
VENTURE HOMES, INC., a Florida corporation, Appellant, v. Thomas J. PRATT, Appellee.
This case arises out of a contract for the sale and purchase of a residence. A jury found that the seller, appellant Venture Homes, Inc., breached the contract and the implied warranty of habitability and failed to construct the home in a workmanlike manner. The final judgment awarded appellee his $27,000 deposit and $1,605 paid directly to Venture Homes for additions, plus interest.
We agree with the trial court that appellant's case rose and fell with the credibility of Maurice Shashoua, its expert witness and the engineer of record on the job. Viewed in the light most favorable to appellee, the evidence indicated that Shashoua did not perform a necessary inspection and that he approved work that was contrary to industry standards. It was up to the jury “to determine the weight and credibility to be given an expert's testimony.” Behm v. Div. of Admin., State Dep't of Transp., 336 So.2d 579, 582 (Fla.1976).
Appellant's motion in limine should have been granted. The complaint and counterclaim both sought liquidated damages under the contract--the deposit monies paid. Whether the seller sold the house after this sale fell through was not relevant to the issue of damages; there was no issue of mitigation of damages. See § 90.401, Fla. Stat. (1999) (providing that “[r]elevent evidence is evidence tending to prove or disprove a material fact”). However, appellant failed to preserve this issue by a contemporaneous objection to testimony and argument concerning the resale at trial. See Fincke v. Peeples, 476 So.2d 1319, 1322 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985).
AFFIRMED.
PER CURIAM.
WARNER, C.J., GROSS and HAZOURI, JJ., concur.
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Docket No: No. 4D99-4148.
Decided: September 20, 2000
Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida,Fourth District.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)