Florida District Courts of Appeal, 1999

Pena v. Rourke

Pena v. Rourke
Florida District Courts of Appeal · Decided April 7, 1999 · Farmer, Stone, Taylor
728 So. 2d 1231; 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 4318; 1999 WL 187359 (Southern Reporter, Second Series)

Pena v. Rourke

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

We affirm a summary judgment entered in favor of the sellers in this action by the buyers to enforce an alleged contract for the sale of real property. The record reflects that upon receipt of the buyers’ initial offer, the sellers modified its terms by a counter-offer. Although the sale price in the counter-offer was accepted by at least one of the buyers, they did not accept an additional provision in terms identical to, or even essentially the same as, the additional term proposed. It is well settled that an acceptance must be according to the same terms as an offer. Mintzberg v. Golestaneh, 390 So.2d 759 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980); Press v. Jordan, 670 So.2d 1016 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996). As a contract would not have been formed even if the alleged acceptance had been communicated to the sellers, all other issues are moot.

STONE, C.J., FARMER and TAYLOR, JJ., concur.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.