Summary
holding party against whom default provision of settlement agreement was enforced could not invoke doctrine of substantial performance "to escape the remedy that the parties chose as the consequence" should she fail to perform, even though strict adherence to terms of default provision seemed harsh
Summary of this case from Clarke v. Glob. Guaranteed Goods & Servs.Opinion
No. 2D07-4048.
August 6, 2008.
Appeal from the Circuit Court, Pinellas County, Mark I. Shames, J.
Charles W. Gerdes of Keane, Reese, Vesely Gerdes, P.A., St. Petersburg, for Appellant.
Randall O. Reder of Randall O. Reder, P.A., Tampa; and Kerry H. Brown, St. Petersburg, for Appellee.
Rosemary T. Learn appeals a final judgment that enforced the default provision of her Mediation Settlement Agreement (MSA) with The Financial Well, Inc. We agree with Ms. Learn that the result of the circuit court's decision to enforce the MSA's default provision in strict adherence to its terms seems harsh under the circumstances of this case. Nevertheless, we affirm the final judgment because Ms. Learn may not invoke the doctrine of substantial performance to escape the remedy that the parties chose as the consequence of a deficiency in her performance under the MSA. See Riesett v. W.B. Doner Co., 293 F.3d 164, 173-75 (4th Cir. 2002); see also Polezoes v. Bartlett, 921 So.2d 35 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006); Hufcor/Gulfstream, Inc. v. Homestead Concrete Drainage, Inc., 831 So.2d 767 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002); Treasure Coast, Inc. v. Ludlum Constr. Co., 760 So.2d 232 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000); Enriquillo Exp. Imp., Inc. v. M.B.R. Indus., Inc., 733 So.2d 1124 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999).
Affirmed.
STRINGER and VILLANTI, JJ., Concur.