History
  • No items yet
midpage
Green Mountain Corp. v. Frink
604 So. 2d 579
Fla. Dist. Ct. App.
1992
Check Treatment
PER CURIAM.

Appellants, Green Mountain Corporation, Inc. and Edward J. Hamilton, appeal a final judgment rendered in favor of Appellee, *580Kelly Frink. We affirm in all respects, except we reverse the award of damages for fraud.

We agree with Green Mountain’s contention that the award of compensatory damages for both breach of contract and fraud was error. The record does not contain any evidence to support an independent award of damages for fraud. Because Frink’s claims for breach of contract and fraud sought the same remedy, namely the wages he would have earned had Green Mountain not breached the contract, Frink was not entitled to recover under both theories. See Rolls v. Bliss & Nyitray, Inc., 408 So.2d 229 (Fla. 3d DCA), dismissed, 415 So.2d 1359 (Fla.1982). Accordingly, we affirm in all respects, except we reverse the award of damages for fraud.

AFFIRMED IN PART AND REVERSED IN PART.

DELL and GUNTHER, JJ., and ALDERMAN, JAMES E., Senior Justice, concur.

Case Details

Case Name: Green Mountain Corp. v. Frink
Court Name: District Court of Appeal of Florida
Date Published: Sep 16, 1992
Citation: 604 So. 2d 579
Docket Number: No. 91-2623
Court Abbreviation: Fla. Dist. Ct. App.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.