HEWITT v. RUSSO GRAHAM (1999)

District Court of Appeal of Florida,First District.

Kristi G. HEWITT, Appellant, v. RUSSO & GRAHAM and Levin, Middlebrooks, Thomas, Mitchell, Green, Echsner, Proctor & Papantonio, P.A., Appellees.

No. 99-1533.

Decided: November 22, 1999

John D. O'Brien, Panama City, for Appellant. M. Robert Blanchard, Pensacola, for Appellees.

AFFIRMED. Although this suit involves a contract for legal services, the breach alleged was not of the service covenant, but rather was of the covenant to pay money for services rendered. Since the contract did not specify a place for payment, the general rule applies that the money was payable at the creditor's residence, which in this case was Escambia County. See Sunshine Yacht Sales, Inc. v. Bob Anslow Yacht Sales, Inc., 669 So.2d 342 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996). Thus, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying appellant's motion to dismiss the complaint for improper venue, because Escambia County was a proper venue selection.

AFFIRMED.

PER CURIAM.

ERVIN, LAWRENCE and PADOVANO, JJ., CONCUR.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

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.

Explore the Network