Florida District Courts of Appeal, 1999

Dentaland, P.A. v. St. Stephen Ltd. Partnership ex rel. LEF/Delray Mall, Ltd.

Dentaland, P.A. v. St. Stephen Ltd. Partnership ex rel. LEF/Delray Mall, Ltd.
Florida District Courts of Appeal · Decided April 14, 1999 · Green, Jorgenson, Schwartz
729 So. 2d 1012; 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 4679; 1999 WL 212100 (Southern Reporter, Second Series)
Dentaland, P.A. v. St. Stephen Ltd. Partnership ex rel. LEF/Delray Mall, Ltd.

Cases that cite this one

5 later published cases cite this decision.

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

PER CURIAM.

Since a party to a contract may not recover in fraud for alleged oral misrepresentations that have been adequately addressed or expressly contradicted in a later written contract, see Hillcrest Pacific Corp. v. Yamamura, 24 Fla. L. Weekly D520, 521, 727 So.2d 1053, 1056 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999); Englezios v. Batmasian, 593 So.2d 1077, 1078 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992); Saunders Leasing Sys., Inc. v. Gulf Cent. Distribution Ctr., Inc., 513 So.2d 1303, 1306-07 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987); see also Schubot v. McDonalds Corp., 757 F.Supp. 1351, 1356 (S.D.Fla. 1990), the fraud action was properly dismissed for failure to state a cause of action. We therefore affirm.

Affirmed.

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