Lapciuc v. Lapciuc, Case No. 3D18-1804 (Fla. 3d DCA 2019).
A trial court should not determine what acts constitute “commercial reasonableness” in a settlement agreement without taking evidence.Dezer Intracoastal Mall, LLC v. Seahorse Grill, LLC, Case No. 3D18-88 (Fla. 3d DCA 2019).
A lease rider which contains the following phrase limits operating expense increases to only three percent per year despite contrary terms contained in main lease:
OPERATING EXPENSES / FIXED INCREASES: Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in the Lease, Operating Expenses (as the term is defined in Section 2.3 of the Lease) shall increase annually during the Term by the fixed amount of three percent (3%) per calendar year over the Operating Expenses in effect for the immediately preceding calendar year, notwithstanding the actual amount of Operating Expenses otherwise allocable to the Leased Premises.Davis v. OneWest Bank, FSB,Case No. 3D18-493 (Fla. 3d DCA 2019).
The Third District re-affirms its holding in OneWest Bank, FSBv. Palmero, 44 Fla. L. Weekly D1049 (Fla. 3d DCA April 24, 2019) (enbanc), that a non-borrowing spouse under a reverse mortgage is a “co-borrower” and foreclosure cannot begin until both spouses pass away.The Burton Family Partnership v. Luani Plaza, Inc., Case No. 3D18-1935
Awarding fees for litigating the amount of fees is proper when the applicable by-laws of the real estate development provide recovery of fees “for litigating the issue ofthe amount of fees to be awarded” in both trial and appellate proceedings.Morales v. Fifth Third Bank, Case No. 4D18-3145 (Fla. 4th DCA 2019).
A lender may not move to conform the pleadings with the evidence to allow introduction of a loan modification agreement when same was not pled.
