Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
Intermodal Transportation Services, Inc. v. Kane Furniture
Citations: 522 So. 2d 1048; 13 Fla. L. Weekly 909; 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 1376; 1988 WL 30235Docket: No. 87-2592
Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida; April 6, 1988; Florida; State Appellate Court
Intermodal entered an agreement with Kane Furniture to transport trailers from Tampa's railroad yard to Kane's headquarters in St. Petersburg. Detention charges arose due to delays in returning the trailers, which Intermodal claimed were attributable to Kane. Intermodal sued for $45,765 on an open account. During a non-jury trial on May 13, 1987, the court determined that the claim on an open account was not valid and suggested that a breach of contract theory should have been pleaded, resulting in a dismissal of the complaint. On May 20, 1987, the trial court confirmed this ruling and allowed Kane ten days to respond to an amended pleading, though it did not specify a deadline for Intermodal's filing. On June 8, 1987, without notifying Intermodal, the court entered a final judgment in favor of Kane, and later denied Intermodal’s post-judgment motions on August 4, 1987. Intermodal timely appealed. Kane argued that the May 13 hearing effectively ended the case, making the May 20 order erroneous. However, the court rejected Kane's position, noting that there was an understanding that the case could continue under a different legal theory. The court found that Kane was aware of the May 20 order prior to its execution and failed to object. Consequently, the appellate court reversed and vacated the June 8 judgment, remanding the case to allow Intermodal to amend its complaint to assert a breach of contract claim. Judges Danahy and Ryder concurred.