Crawford Residences, LLC v. Banco Popular North America
2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 8349
| Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | 2012Background
- Crawford Residences, LLC borrowed money from Banco Popular North America to finance construction of a Naples condominium project, secured by a mortgage and personal guaranties from Carondelet, LLC and Eduardo Goudie.
- In June 2008 Crawford signed a renewed promissory note and a mortgage extension that postponed final payment to August 15, 2008 and included a broad release of Crawford’s liability and defenses up to that date.
- Banco sued Crawford for default; Crawford counterclaimed and asserted defenses related to Banco’s funding delays during construction.
- The trial court bifurcated proceedings to determine whether the release barred Crawford’s counterclaims and defenses, and granted the motion.
- Goudie testified, via affidavit, that substantial completion occurred by May 2008 and that delays pre-February 14, 2008 largely caused project failure; Crawford argued post-release breaches could exist.
- The appellate court reversed, holding there was not competent substantial evidence showing judicial estoppel barred Crawford’s post-release claims and remanded for adjudication of those claims.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether judicial estoppel bars Crawford’s post-release claims | Crawford contends the release does not bar post-release breaches. | Banco contends Crawford is judicially estopped from asserting post-release claims. | Reversed; no judicial estoppel; remand for post-release defenses/counterclaims. |
Key Cases Cited
- Zeeuw v. BFI Waste Sys. of N. Am., Inc., 997 So.2d 1218 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008) (judicial estoppel requires inconsistency and reliance)
- Blumberg v. USAA Cas. Ins. Co., 790 So.2d 1061 (Fla.2001) (estoppel requires misled party and unjust result)
- In re Estate of Sterile, 902 So.2d 915 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005) (trial court credibility findings reviewed for substantial evidence)
- Shaw v. Shaw, 384 So.2d 13 (Fla.1976) (trial court credibility deference principle)
- Grau v. Provident Life & Accident Ins. Co., 899 So.2d 396 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005) (estoppel requires first court to adopt the position)