option clause in Florida

2006See §§ 672.711, .714, Fla. Stat. (2005); Fryatt v. Lantana One, Ltd., 866 So.2d 158 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004); Winterbotham v. Computer Corps, Inc., 490 So.2d 1282 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986); Royco, Inc. v. Cottengim, 427 So.2d 759 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983), review denied, 431 So.2d 989 (Fla.1983); Carter Hawley Hale Stores, Inc., 372 So.2d at 965 ; see also Music Acceptance Corp. v. Lofing, 32 Cal.App.4th 610 , 39 Cal.Rptr.2d 159 (1995)(applying rule to delivery of defective piano).

2006See §§ 672.711, .714, Fla. Stat. (2005); Fryatt v. Lantana One, Ltd., 866 So.2d 158 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004); Winterbotham v. Computer Corps, Inc., 490 So.2d 1282 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986); Royco, Inc. v. Cottengim, 427 So.2d 759 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983), review denied, 431 So.2d 989 (Fla.1983); Carter Hawley Hale Stores, Inc., 372 So.2d at 965 ; see also Music Acceptance Corp. v. Lofing, 32 Cal.App.4th 610 , 39 Cal.Rptr.2d 159 (1995)(applying rule to delivery of defective piano).

2006See §§ 672.711, .714, Fla. Stat. (2005); Fryatt v. Lantana One, Ltd., 866 So.2d 158 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004); Winterbotham v. Computer Corps, Inc., 490 So.2d 1282 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986); Royco, Inc. v. Cottengim, 427 So.2d 759 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983), review denied, 431 So.2d 989 (Fla.1983); Carter Hawley Hale Stores, Inc., 372 So.2d at 965 ; see also Music Acceptance Corp. v. Lofing, 32 Cal.App.4th 610 , 39 Cal.Rptr.2d 159 (1995)(applying rule to delivery of defective piano).

2006See §§ 672.711, .714, Fla. Stat. (2005); Fryatt v. Lantana One, Ltd., 866 So.2d 158 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004); Winterbotham v. Computer Corps, Inc., 490 So.2d 1282 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986); Royco, Inc. v. Cottengim, 427 So.2d 759 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983), review denied, 431 So.2d 989 (Fla.1983); Carter Hawley Hale Stores, Inc., 372 So.2d at 965 ; see also Music Acceptance Corp. v. Lofing, 32 Cal.App.4th 610 , 39 Cal.Rptr.2d 159 (1995)(applying rule to delivery of defective piano).

2000The mere existence of the option is not a violation of Poland's constitutional rights."), cert. denied, 523 U.S. 1082 , 118 S.Ct. 1533 , 140 L.Ed.2d 683 (1998); Campbell v. Wood, 18 F.3d 662, 688 (9th Cir.1994) ("We cannot say the State descends to inhuman depths by allowing the condemned to exercise... an election [of execution method].

2000The mere existence of the option is not a violation of Poland's constitutional rights."), cert. denied, 523 U.S. 1082 , 118 S.Ct. 1533 , 140 L.Ed.2d 683 (1998); Campbell v. Wood, 18 F.3d 662, 688 (9th Cir.1994) ("We cannot say the State descends to inhuman depths by allowing the condemned to exercise... an election [of execution method].

1994In Beck v. Alabama, 447 U.S. 625, 638 , 100 S.Ct. 2382, 2390 , 65 L.Ed.2d 392 (1980), the United States Supreme Court determined that a state is constitutionally prohibited from withdrawing the option of instruction on lesser-included offenses in a capital case when it enhances the risk of an unwarranted conviction.

1994In Beck v. Alabama, 447 U.S. 625, 638 , 100 S.Ct. 2382, 2390 , 65 L.Ed.2d 392 (1980), the United States Supreme Court determined that a state is constitutionally prohibited from withdrawing the option of instruction on lesser-included offenses in a capital case when it enhances the risk of an unwarranted conviction.

1993Partners I, 545 So.2d 316 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989), the trial court entered judgment, finding that the intent of the parties underlying a non-recordation clause was: "[they] intended that an unauthorized recording of the Option Agreement would constitute a default and that the default would entitle the optionor to terminate the Option Agreement." The court went on to conclude that a later recording by counsel for SK (buyer) of the option was a violation of the agreement; that Roschman (seller) gave SK legally sufficient notice of its termination of the option to purchase; and that the seller by its

1991Thus, the court found it unnecessary to apply the doctrine of merger to reach the result for which the parties had bargained. 458 So.2d at 894 .

1991In contrast, the option clause before the Contos court gave the lessee the option to purchase the "leased premises." Contos, 433 So.2d at 1243 .

1985In Philpot, 411 So.2d at 1341 , the trial court found that a lessor who had accepted late performance under a lease had waived his right to later declare an option clause in the lease to be void.

1955And compare Frissell v. Nichols, supra [ 94 Fla. 403 , 114 So. 434 ] wherein, while it was not expressly determined whether or not such a provision in the lease would in every instance make such an option clause personal, it was indicated by this court that the issue might be one of fact; that is, that there might be a "showing to the contrary" by evidence such as that recited by the trial court in the instant case to the effect that the contract between the original parties did not, in fact, involve a relation of personal confidence and reliance on the solvency and pecuniary credit of the les

1955What should be the rule in Florida on this precise issue need not herein be decided; for it has been uniformly held in every jurisdiction where the question has arisen, that "even though the purchaser was to be extended a credit, the option may be enforced by an assignee who offers to pay cash or in advance." 32 Am.Jur., Landlord and Tenant, Sec. 302, p. 282; In re Niagara Radiator Co., D.C., 164 F. 102 , and cases cited; Jenkins v. Columbia Land & Improvement Co., 13 Wash. 502 , 43 P. 328 ; Annotation 38 A.L.R. 1175 .

1955What should be the rule in Florida on this precise issue need not herein be decided; for it has been uniformly held in every jurisdiction where the question has arisen, that "even though the purchaser was to be extended a credit, the option may be enforced by an assignee who offers to pay cash or in advance." 32 Am.Jur., Landlord and Tenant, Sec. 302, p. 282; In re Niagara Radiator Co., D.C., 164 F. 102 , and cases cited; Jenkins v. Columbia Land & Improvement Co., 13 Wash. 502 , 43 P. 328 ; Annotation 38 A.L.R. 1175 .

1955What should be the rule in Florida on this precise issue need not herein be decided; for it has been uniformly held in every jurisdiction where the question has arisen, that "even though the purchaser was to be extended a credit, the option may be enforced by an assignee who offers to pay cash or in advance." 32 Am.Jur., Landlord and Tenant, Sec. 302, p. 282; In re Niagara Radiator Co., D.C., 164 F. 102 , and cases cited; Jenkins v. Columbia Land & Improvement Co., 13 Wash. 502 , 43 P. 328 ; Annotation 38 A.L.R. 1175 .

1954In Monotype Composition Co., Inc., v. Kiernan, 319 Mass. 456 , 66 N.E.2d 565 , it was held that stockholders might enjoin a sale of pledged stock and require its redemption, in a suit against a pledgee who acquired his lien with notice of a prohibition against "sale or transfer" without first giving other stockholders an opportunity to exercise their option, the pledge itself being deemed to be repugnant to the option clause.

1954In Monotype Composition Co., Inc., v. Kiernan, 319 Mass. 456 , 66 N.E.2d 565 , it was held that stockholders might enjoin a sale of pledged stock and require its redemption, in a suit against a pledgee who acquired his lien with notice of a prohibition against "sale or transfer" without first giving other stockholders an opportunity to exercise their option, the pledge itself being deemed to be repugnant to the option clause.