774 So. 2d 66 | Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | 2000
Robert C. Collins and Phyllis Collins appeal a final judgment entered after a bench trial in favor of Brenda Fay Bannon and Otis Scott Jeffrey. The final judgment found that a real estate agreement between the parties was unenforceable because there was no meeting of the minds. We agree with the Collinses that the trial court improperly based the final judgment on this issue where neither party raised it.
A judgment may not be based on an issue that has not been framed by the pleadings, noticed for hearing, or litigated by the parties. See Gordon v. Gordon, 543 So.2d 428 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989); see also Noonan-Judson v. Surrency, 669 So.2d 1058 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996). In Spencer v. Devine, 364 So.2d 22 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978), the trial court found that an agreement between the parties was void ab initio, because it was so vague and ambiguous that no meeting of the minds ever existed. The First District reversed, holding that such finding was improper where the issue was neither framed by the pleadings nor raised by the parties at trial. See 364 So.2d at 23.
In the present case, Bannon and Jeffrey alleged in count I of their complaint that the Collinses were required to pay them $1,500 as a deposit pursuant to the contract.
Accordingly, the final judgment is reversed and remanded for further proceedings consistent herewith.
. The trial court entered a directed verdict in favor of the Collinses as to count I.
. In the final judgment, the trial court found that the contract contained a sufficient description of the property.