Opinion
3D23-0821
07-31-2024
Andrew Stein, et al., Appellants, v. Fava Design Group, LLC, Appellee.
MGS Law, P.A., and Michael G. St. Jacques, II (Jupiter), for appellants. Frank Charles Miranda, P.A., and Frank C. Miranda (Tampa), for appellee.
Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Lower Tribunal No. 20-20009 Jose M. Rodriguez, Judge.
MGS Law, P.A., and Michael G. St. Jacques, II (Jupiter), for appellants.
Frank Charles Miranda, P.A., and Frank C. Miranda (Tampa), for appellee.
Before EMAS, LINDSEY, and BOKOR, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
Appellants (Defendants below) Andrew and Wendy Stein appeal a final judgment finding them in breach of contract against Appellee (Plaintiff below) Fava Design, LLC, an interior design firm. The dispute arises from a remodeling project of the Steins' residence. On appeal, the Steins argue that Fava Design acted as an unlicensed contractor, and, as a result, all contracts are unenforceable. They further argue that even if the contracts were enforceable, the trial court reversibly erred in finding they had reached an agreement with Fava Design about the scope and price of its services.
We affirm because competent substantial evidence in the record supports the trial court's finding, after a two-day bench trial, that the Steins breached their agreement with Fava Design and that Fava Design did not act as an unlicensed contractor. See Sg 2901, LLC v. Complimenti, Inc., 323 So.3d 804, 806 (Fla. 3d DCA 2021) ("We review a judgment rendered after a bench trial to ensure that the trial court's findings of fact are supported by competent, substantial evidence." (quoting Haas Automation, Inc. v. Fox, 243 So.3d 1017, 1023 (Fla. 3d DCA 2018))).
Affirmed.