Jobear, Inc. v. Dewind Machinery Co.

Docket: No. 80-1785

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida; September 2, 1981; Florida; State Appellate Court

EnglishEspañolSimplified EnglishEspañol Fácil
An appeal and cross-appeal addressed the final judgment awarding $2,704 plus costs to the appellee for a machinery rental debt. The court affirmed the award but remanded for an amended final judgment to include interest. The appellee initiated the action in February 1980 to collect two debts: one for equipment rental and another for parts and labor. In July 1980, while the case was pending, an office secretary from the appellant sent a check covering the parts and labor debt, which included a restrictive endorsement stating that endorsement or retention of the check would constitute payment in full and release the appellant from all claims by the appellee.

The court found that the secretary had not communicated with appellee’s representatives about whether the check would settle the debt, and there was no accompanying explanation letter. The court noted that the appellee's receptionist handled incoming mail and checks without any officer seeing the check upon receipt. The appellant argued that the acceptance of the check operated as an accord and satisfaction for all claims, relying on precedents that involved clear intent from the debtor, which the court distinguished from the current case due to the separate natures of the two debts and the specific restrictive language of the endorsement.

Additionally, the appellant contended that a novation occurred when it requested termination of the rental, but the trial court ruled that there was no termination or communication that would excuse the rental obligation. The appellee cross-appealed for interest on the unpaid rent, which was supported by the equipment lease agreement that included a late charge provision. The court agreed with the final judgment but mandated the inclusion of interest, resulting in a partial affirmation, partial reversal, and remand for amendment. Judges Anstead and Hurley concurred.