Beeman v. Island Breakers
Cases that cite this one
4 later published cases cite this decision.
- Colony Beach & Tennis Club Ass'n v. Colony Beach & Tennis Club, Inc. (In re Colony Beach & Tennis Club Ass'n) (United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida 2010)
- Palafrugell Holdings, Inc. v. Cassel (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2003)
- MAISON GRANDE CONDO. ASS'N v. Dorten (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)
- Maison Grande Condominium Ass'n v. Dorten, Inc. (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
REPUBLISHED OPINION
On the court’s own motion the opinion previously published at 577 So.2d 1341 is republished in order to correct the scrivener’s error detailed below. See Washington v. State, 92 Fla. 740, 745-46, 110 So. 259, 261 (1926).
At 577 So.2d 1346, in the left-hand column, in the penultimate sentence of the first paragraph (which is continued from the preceding page), the opinion reads as follows:
The presumption is rebuttable, and failure of a lease to contain all of the enumerated elements neither precludes a determination of unconscionability nor raises a presumption of unconscionability.
(Emphasis added).
The sentence should read as follows:
The presumption is rebuttable, and failure of a lease to contain all of the enumerated elements neither precludes a de*1032 termination of unconscionability nor raises a presumption of conscionability.
Except for the above-stated correction, the opinion is otherwise unchanged.
It is so ordered.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.