descrybe logo
You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Alrodo Corp. v. Carl Scheffer-Klute GMBH & Co.

Citations: 464 So. 2d 1304; 10 Fla. L. Weekly 706; 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 12904Docket: No. 83-2108

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida; March 11, 1985; Florida; State Appellate Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

The trial court determined that the appellee breached an exclusive sales agreement. However, it concluded that (1) the appellant could not prove profit losses from the breach, as there was no established profit history, rendering the claimed damages speculative, and (2) the breach did not relieve the appellant of liabilities incurred before the breach occurred. The appellate court upheld the trial court's findings and conclusions on both the main appeal and the cross-appeal, as they were supported by competent substantial evidence. The decision is affirmed, referencing Laufer v. Norma Fashions, Inc., 418 So.2d 437 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982).

Legal Issues Addressed

Appellate Review Standards

Application: The appellate court affirmed the trial court's decision, finding that the conclusions were supported by competent substantial evidence.

Reasoning: The appellate court upheld the trial court's findings and conclusions on both the main appeal and the cross-appeal, as they were supported by competent substantial evidence.

Breach of Exclusive Sales Agreement

Application: The trial court found that the appellee had breached the exclusive sales agreement, yet this did not automatically entitle the appellant to damages.

Reasoning: The trial court determined that the appellee breached an exclusive sales agreement.

Liability Despite Breach

Application: The breach of the agreement did not absolve the appellant of liabilities that were incurred prior to the breach.

Reasoning: The breach did not relieve the appellant of liabilities incurred before the breach occurred.

Speculative Damages

Application: The appellant was unable to recover damages for lost profits due to the lack of an established profit history, making the damages claimed speculative.

Reasoning: The appellant could not prove profit losses from the breach, as there was no established profit history, rendering the claimed damages speculative.