Jones v. Warmack
Florida District Court of Appeal
967 So.2d 400 (2007)
- Written by Rich Walter, JD
Facts
Richard Warmack (defendant) contracted to assign certain property rights to J. Michael Jones (plaintiff). The contract required Jones to make three scheduled down payments, and provided that if Warmack could not or would not address potential title defects within a designated timeframe, Jones would have a 10-day option period in which he could either terminate the contract or proceed with the transaction. The contract also provided that one party's breach of the contract would give the other party the right to retain or recover the down payments. Jones made the first two down payments and notified Warmack of several title defects, some of which Warmack said he could not address within the designated timeframe. The deadline for making the final down payment fell within the option period. When Jones missed that deadline, Warmack notified Jones that Jones was in default, and that therefore Warmack would keep Jones's first two down payments. Jones responded that Warmack's stated inability to cure the title defects was an anticipatory breach that terminated the contract. Jones sued Warmack to recover the two down payments. The trial court granted Warmack's motion for summary judgment and ruled that Warmack was entitled to keep the down payments. Jones appealed to the district appellate court.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Thomas, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 804,000 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.
