Thursday, August 13, 2009

A Party Cannot Recover For Misrepresentations Dealt With in Later Written Contract

In TRG Night Hawk Ltd. v. Registry Development Corporation (2D08-5181), the Second District reversed the trial court's denial of a motion for directed verdict. The court stated:

A party cannot recover for alleged false misrepresentations that are adequately dealt with or expressly contradicted in a later written contract...'To hold otherwise is to invite contracting parties to make agreements of the kind in suit and then avoid them by simply taking the stand and swearing that they relied on some other statement.'...Further, a party who signs a contract whose terms contradict the alleged misrepresentations on which he relied is barred 'from seeking relief pursuant to FDUTPA, as he acted unreasonably.'

As such, the Buyer could not justifiably rely on any representations from TRG concerning governmental approvals and the number of units that could be built on the property. The trial court should have granted TRG's motion for a directed verdict. See St. Joseph's Hosp. v. Cowart, 891 So. 2d 1039, 1042 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004) (holding that "[a] motion for directed verdict should be granted if there is no evidence on which a jury could legally base a verdict for damages against the moving party").


Post a Comment