UN2JC AIR 1, LLC v. R. D. DON WHITTINGTON
20-1449
| Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Jun 30, 2021Background
- UN2JC (lessee) entered a February 2005 lease‑purchase agreement (LPA) for a Learjet showing World Jet of Delaware, Inc. (WJD) as Lessor/Owner; a Repair Addendum authorized UN2JC to obtain listed repairs and deduct costs from payments.
- Aircraft delivered May 12, 2005; UN2JC incurred over $100,000 in repairs and withheld the June payment asserting a repair credit; WJD disputed commercial reasonableness of repairs.
- On June 16, 2005, WJD/Whittington entities retook the aircraft from a repair facility by flying it away without notice; later the plane was removed from the hangar by Whittington affiliates.
- UN2JC sued Whittington entities (including World Jet, Inc.) for breach, fraud, and later added a conversion claim against World Jet, Inc., alleging it was the record title owner and unlawfully appropriated the plane.
- The trial court had previously ruled World Jet, Inc. was not a party to the LPA but later granted summary judgment to World Jet, Inc. on conversion, applying the independent‑tort doctrine because similar facts supported a breach claim against WJD.
- The Fourth District reversed: because World Jet, Inc. is not a party to the contract, the independent‑tort rule does not bar UN2JC’s conversion claim, and the alleged conversion was legally independent of any contract breach.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether independent‑tort doctrine bars UN2JC’s conversion claim against World Jet, Inc. | Independent‑tort doctrine does not apply to a defendant who is not a party to the underlying contract; conversion is an independent tort. | Conversion is barred because the same facts underpin a breach‑of‑contract claim against WJD; damages overlap. | Reversed: doctrine applies only among contracting parties; World Jet, Inc. was not a party, so conversion claim survives. |
| Whether alleged conduct (taking the aircraft) states a tort independent of contract | The complaint alleges superior possessory right and a willful wrongful taking — an independent conversion. | Any tort claim is essentially a contract dispute and should be limited to contract remedies. | Held conversion is an independent tort here (similar to wrongful replevin cases); allegations suffice to show superior right and wrongful taking. |
| Whether appellant defaulted so repossession was lawful (Mayo v. Allen) | No record evidence of default; summary judgment inappropriate on that basis. | Appellee argues repossession was lawful due to purchaser default. | Held: no evidence of default in summary‑judgment record; Mayo inapplicable at this stage. |
| Procedural/pleading defenses (lack of transcript, commingled claims, estoppel) | Record (motions and affidavits) is sufficient; conversion count applies to World Jet, Inc. | Various procedural defenses (no transcript, improper joinder, estoppel) argued as bases to affirm. | Held: transcript not required for review; no fatal commingling or estoppel shown; these arguments fail. |
Key Cases Cited
- Island Travel & Tours, Ltd., Co. v. MYR Indep., Inc., 300 So. 3d 1236 (Fla. 3d DCA 2020) (independent‑tort rule barring tort recovery for contract disputes unless tort is independent)
- Peebles v. Puig, 223 So. 3d 1065 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017) (same principle regarding tort vs. contract remedies)
- Indem. Ins. Co. of N. Am. v. Am. Aviation, Inc., 891 So. 2d 532 (Fla. 2004) (independent‑tort rule applies only to parties to the contract)
- Edwards v. Landsman, 51 So. 3d 1208 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011) (conversion/replevin claim may be independent remedy despite conditional sales contract)
- Joseph v. Chanin, 940 So. 2d 483 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006) (definition of conversion as wrongful assertion of dominion over another’s possessory rights)
- Mayo v. Allen, 973 So. 2d 1257 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008) (represents situation where repossession was lawful after purchaser default — distinguished here)