Havens v. Florida
117 So. 3d 1179
Fla. Dist. Ct. App.2013Background
- Havens, a dentist, began working for Coast Florida in 1996.
- In 2007, Coast and Havens entered into a five-year employment agreement.
- Three years later, Havens was suspended without pay and told to vacate the office during Coast's investigation, with instructions not to seek other employment due to the noncompete.
- Havens alleged the suspension breached the employment agreement and sought restoration of compensation; Coast argued the contract was silent on suspensions.
- Havens resigned and filed suit; after multiple dismissals, she filed a second amended complaint alleging breach, anticipatory breach, constructive termination, and implied duty of good faith.
- The trial court dismissed with prejudice; the appellate court reversed, holding the complaint alleged breach and that silence on suspensions did not bar a breach claim.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the complaint states a breach of contract claim. | Havens asserts suspension without pay breached compensation terms. | Contract silent on suspensions; no breach stated. | Yes, breach alleged. |
| Whether silence about suspensions bars breach claim. | Ambiguity in contract regarding suspensions must be construed against Coast. | Silence means no breach possible. | No; ambiguity construed against Coast; breach pleaded. |
| Whether anticipatory breach survives. | Oral suspension instruction constitutes anticipatory breach. | No anticipatory breach given silence on suspension terms. | Survives; pleaded. |
| Whether constructive termination and implied duty claims are properly pleaded. | Actions effectively terminate Havens and breach implied duty of good faith. | Not adequately pleaded under contract terms. | Pleaded adequately. |
Key Cases Cited
- Mettler, Inc. v. Ellen Tracy, Inc., 648 So.2d 253 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994) (review of complaint for state action, favorable to plaintiff)
- Londono v. Turkey Creek, Inc., 609 So.2d 14 (Fla.1992) (four-corners rule for complaint adequacy)
- Orlando Sports Stadium, Inc. v. State ex rel. Powell, 262 So.2d 881 (Fla.1972) (framing of complaint standards and relief)
- Drew v. Knowles, 511 So.2d 393 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987) (pleading requirements and inference in favor of plaintiff)
- MEBA Med. & Benefits Plan v. Lago, 867 So.2d 1184 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004) (contract interpretation and ambiguity principles)
- City of Homestead v. Johnson, 760 So.2d 80 (Fla.2000) (ambiguity construed against the drafter)