Allie v. Ionata
Florida Supreme Court
503 So. 2d 1237 (1987)
- Written by Liz Nakamura, JD
Facts
Robert Allie (plaintiff) was Fred Ionata’s (defendant) accountant. On Allie’s recommendation, Ionata purchased parcels of land from Allie on a payment plan to act as tax shelters. Several years later, Ionata discovered he had been severely overcharged and sued Allie to rescind the contract-of-sale, alleging breach-of-fiduciary-duty and fraud. Allie countered, arguing that the rescission statute-of-limitations had expired, and filed a counterclaim for the outstanding balance owed under the contract-of-sale. The trial court denied Allie’s counterclaim and rescinded the contract-of-sale, holding that Allie had breached his fiduciary-duty to Ionata. Allie appealed. On appeal, the appellate court reversed and remanded, holding that Ionata’s rescission claim was time-barred by the statute-of-limitations (the Allie I ruling). Ionata did not appeal. On remand, Allie pursued his revived counterclaim to enforce payment under the contract-of-sale. Ionata pleaded a recoupment affirmative defense for the overpayment he made under the contract-of-sale and, through what was effectively a counter-counterclaim, again sought to rescind the contract-of-sale. The trial court rescinded the contract-of-sale. Allie appealed, arguing that Ionata’s right to seek rescission, a form of affirmative relief, was (1) barred by the rescission statute-of-limitations; and (2) barred by res-judicata based on the Allie I ruling. The appellate court (a) partially-reversed, holding that, because the rescission statute-of-limitations had expired, Ionata was not entitled to rescind the contract-of-sale; and (b) partially-affirmed, holding that Ionata could assert a recoupment defense against Allie but only up to the amount Allie claimed as the outstanding contract-of-sale balance. The appellate court then certified a question to the Florida Supreme Court regarding whether a defendant was prohibited from filing a compulsory counterclaim in recoupment seeking affirmative relief that would otherwise be time-barred by the relevant statute-of-limitations.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Barkett, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 810,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.