Craigside, LLC v. Gdc View, LLC
74 So. 3d 1087
Fla. Dist. Ct. App.2011Background
- Craigside contracted to buy unit 1950 for $1,125,000 from GDC in 2004, paying $225,000 escrow and $900,000 later.
- Closing was due by May 1, 2007, with extensions only for events beyond GDC's control; liquidated damages permitted if purchaser defaulted.
- On April 16, 2007, Craigside repudiated the contract, stating it would not close and demanding return of funds with interest.
- GDC sold the unit to a third party in July 2008 and later returned the $900,000 but kept the $225,000 deposit; no interest paid on $900,000.
- Trial court held GDC had no breach and awarded judgment for GDC; appellate issue concerns damages and interest on the $900,000.
- Court of Appeal held Craigside entitled to interest on the $900,000 from April 16, 2007 until August 26, 2008, and remanded for entry of such interest.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether anticipatory repudiation by Craigside ended its performance and allowed damages | Craigside argues GDC breached by not timely completing and that repudiation permitted recovery of funds with interest. | GDC contends no default occurred and no damages due beyond return of funds. | Anticipatory repudiation entitled Craigside to damages and return of funds; remand for interest on $900,000. |
| Whether Craigside defaulted to trigger liquidated damages and loss of the $225,000 deposit | Deposit of $225,000 upon execution was retained only if Craigside defaulted; Craigside argues default did not occur. | GDC was entitled to retain the $225,000 as liquidated damages for purchaser's default. | GDC could retain the $225,000 as liquidated damages; interest on the $900,000 remains the issue. |
| Whether Craigside is entitled to prejudgment interest on the $900,000 | Interest should run from the date funds were due to be returned (breach/renunciation date). | Interest should be limited or denied beyond the initial deposit basis. | Craigside entitled to interest on $900,000 at 2010 statutory rate from April 16, 2007 to August 26, 2008. |
Key Cases Cited
- Bosem v. Musa Holdings, Inc., 46 So.3d 42 (Fla.2010) (prejudgment interest for pecuniary loss is proper)
- American Linens, Inc. v. Venmall Int'l Grp., 645 So.2d 1059 (Fla.3d DCA 1994) (debt due date determines interest accrual)
- Chadwick v. Corbin, 476 So.2d 1366 (Fla.1st DCA 1985) (damages accrue from due date, not judgment)
- Picard v. Burroughs, 304 So.2d 455 (Fla.1st DCA 1974) (repudiation may terminate contract without formal notice)
- Realty Securities Corp. v. Johnson, 111 So. 532 (Fla.1927) (notice not always required where breach proven by abandonment)
- Sullivan v. McMillan, 8 So. 450 (Fla.1890) (renunciation can end contract and allow breach action)
- Hosp. Mortg. Grp. v. First Prudential Dev. Corp., 411 So.2d 181 (Fla.1982) (damages caused by contract losses accrue from when due)