Florida Statutes

Fla. Stat. § 675.111 (2025)

Remedies.

✓ 2025 Florida Statutes — current through the 2025 Regular Session

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section FL-LEGleg.state.fl.us JustiaFla. Statutes CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

675.111 Remedies.—

(1) If an issuer wrongfully dishonors or repudiates its obligation to pay money under a letter of credit before presentation, the beneficiary, successor, or nominated person presenting on its own behalf may recover from the issuer the amount that is the subject of the dishonor or repudiation. If the issuer’s obligation under the letter of credit is not for the payment of money, the claimant may obtain specific performance or, at the claimant’s election, recover an amount equal to the value of performance from the issuer. In either case, the claimant may also recover incidental but not consequential damages. The claimant is not obligated to take action to avoid damages that might be due from the issuer under this subsection. If, although not obligated to do so, the claimant avoids damages, the claimant’s recovery from the issuer must be reduced by the amount of damages avoided. The issuer has the burden of proving the amount of damages avoided. In the case of repudiation the claimant need not present any document.

(2) If an issuer wrongfully dishonors a draft or demand presented under a letter of credit or honors a draft or demand in breach of its obligation to the applicant, the applicant may recover damages resulting from the breach, including incidental but not consequential damages, less any amount saved as a result of the breach.

(3) If an adviser or nominated person other than a confirmer breaches an obligation under this chapter or an issuer breaches an obligation not covered in subsection (1) or subsection (2), a person to whom the obligation is owed may recover damages resulting from the breach, including incidental but not consequential damages, less any amount saved as a result of the breach. To the extent of the confirmation, a confirmer has the liability of an issuer specified in this subsection and subsections (1) and (2).

(4) An issuer, nominated person, or adviser who is found liable under subsection (1), subsection (2), or subsection (3) shall pay interest on the amount owed thereunder from the date of wrongful dishonor or other appropriate date.

(5) Reasonable attorney’s fees and other expenses of litigation must be awarded to the prevailing party in an action in which a remedy is sought under this chapter.

(6) Damages that would otherwise be payable by a party for breach of an obligation under this chapter may be liquidated by agreement or undertaking, but only in an amount or by a formula that is reasonable in light of the harm anticipated.

History.—s. 1, ch. 65-254; s. 1, ch. 99-137.

Note.—s. 5-111, U.C.C.; supersedes s. 675.32.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 6 cases, 1998–2014 · leading case: Dependable Component Supply, Inc. v. Carrefour Informatique Tremblant, Inc., 572 F. App'x 796 (11th Cir. 2014).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Dependable Component Supply, Inc. v. Carrefour Informatique Tremblant, Inc., 572 F. App'x 796 (11th Cir. 2014). · cites it 2× “That provision states that “[reasonable attorney’s fees and other expenses of litigation must be awarded to the prevailing party in an action in which a remedy is sought under this chapter,” which includes the claim for wrongful dishonor of a letter of credit asserted by…”

Jaffe v. Bank of Am., N.A., 674 F. Supp. 2d 1360 (S.D. Fla. 2009). · cites it 3× “Fla. Stat. § 675.111 (5), cmt. 6. BoA notes that Plaintiffs sought an injunction to prevent BoA from paying ABC under the letter of credit, which is a remedy specifically authorized under Florida Statute 675.”

Banco Lavra, S.A. v. Cargil Int'l, 732 So. 2d 1086 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998). · cites it 7× “No action for breach of warranty lies under section 675.111. The other claims raised in the complaint derive from the honoring of the letter of credit and likewise fail to state a claim for relief.”

2002 Irrevocable Trust For Richard C. Hvizdak v. The Huntington Nat'l Bank, 515 F. App'x 792 (11th Cir. 2013). · cites it 2× “See Fla. Stat. § 675.111 (5). We disagree and affirm.”

Jaffe v. Bank of Am. Corp., 399 F. App'x 535 (11th Cir. 2010). · cites it 5× “On appeal, the Jaffes contend the district court’s order was erroneous because: (1) the Jaffes did not assent to the attorneys’ fees and costs provision of the Application and Agreement governing the Letter of Credit, and (2) the Jaffes were not liable for attorneys’ fees and…”

Jaffe v. Bank of Am. Corp. (11th Cir. 2010). · cites it 5× “On appeal, the Jaffes contend the district court’s order was erroneous because: (1) the Jaffes did not assent to the attorneys’ fees and costs provision of the Application and Agreement governing the Letter of Credit, and (2) the Jaffes were not liable for attorneys’ fees and…”

— 675.111(1) — 1 case

Banco Lavra, S.A. v. Cargil Int'l, 732 So. 2d 1086 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998). “No action for breach of warranty lies under section 675.111. The other claims raised in the complaint derive from the honoring of the letter of credit and likewise fail to state a claim for relief.”

— 675.111(5) — 1 case

Jaffe v. Bank of Am., N.A., 674 F. Supp. 2d 1360 (S.D. Fla. 2009). “Fla. Stat. § 675.111 (5), cmt. 6. BoA notes that Plaintiffs sought an injunction to prevent BoA from paying ABC under the letter of credit, which is a remedy specifically authorized under Florida Statute 675.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.