From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Atlas Pools of Palm v. P.V. Constr

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District
Sep 19, 1984
455 So. 2d 1120 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1984)

Summary

In Atlas Pools of the Palm Beaches, Inc. v. P.V. Construction Corp., 455 So.2d 1120 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984), this court reversed, stating that from the four corners of the complaint it was not possible to tell whether the late charge provision was an inducement to make timely payment, a forbearance to enforce collection of a debt, or a provision for liquidated damages. If it was found to be liquidated damages, it would then be necessary to determine whether the damages provided for were reasonably proportionate to the damages sustained.

Summary of this case from P.V. Const. Corp. v. Kovner

Opinion

No. 83-1584.

September 19, 1984.

Appeal from the Circuit Court, Palm Beach County, Timothy P. Poulton, J.

Cynthia S. Greenhouse of Cohen, Scherer Cohen, P.A., Lake Worth, for appellant.

Robert S. Levy of Law Offices of Robert S. Levy, P.A., West Palm Beach, for appellee.


We do not believe a protracted recitation of the facts of this case will contribute to the body of the law. Suffice it to say, a homeowner, in an amendment to a contract for the construction of a pool, agreed to a "late charge" of 1% for each day he failed to make the final payment thereon. The balance owed on the pool was $1,880 and by the time the motion to dismiss was heard the late charge totalled $4,414.

The motion to dismiss the pool builder's complaint was filed by the homeowner upon the basis that the late charge was tantamount to interest at a usurious rate. The trial court agreed and granted the motion. We reverse.

This controversy should not have been disposed of on a motion to dismiss. From the four corners of the complaint, it cannot be determined whether the "late charge" was a provision to induce timely payment of an obligation, see Homewood Investment Co. v. Moses, 608 P.2d 503 (Nev. 1980), a forbearance to enforce the collection of a debt, or a provision for liquidated damages. Moreover, assuming it was a liquidated damages provision, there would remain the question of whether it was reasonably proportionate to the damages sustained.

This cause is reversed and remanded for further proceedings.

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

HERSEY and WALDEN, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Atlas Pools of Palm v. P.V. Constr

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District
Sep 19, 1984
455 So. 2d 1120 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1984)

In Atlas Pools of the Palm Beaches, Inc. v. P.V. Construction Corp., 455 So.2d 1120 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984), this court reversed, stating that from the four corners of the complaint it was not possible to tell whether the late charge provision was an inducement to make timely payment, a forbearance to enforce collection of a debt, or a provision for liquidated damages. If it was found to be liquidated damages, it would then be necessary to determine whether the damages provided for were reasonably proportionate to the damages sustained.

Summary of this case from P.V. Const. Corp. v. Kovner
Case details for

Atlas Pools of Palm v. P.V. Constr

Case Details

Full title:ATLAS POOLS OF THE PALM BEACHES, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, APPELLANT…

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District

Date published: Sep 19, 1984

Citations

455 So. 2d 1120 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1984)

Citing Cases

P.V. Const. Corp. v. Kovner

The first appeal was from the trial court's dismissal of the suit on the basis of the homeowner's contention…