All too often commercial parties sign contracts without paying much attention to the “boilerplate” provisions. And all too often that causes a problem for one of the parties. Such was the case for an Orlando landlord that didn’t pay enough attention to the demand requirement in a lease guaranty. The result in Nabbie v. Orlando Outlet Owner, LLC, a new decision from Florida’s Fifth District Court of Appeal, should serve as a “heads up” for Florida commercial landlords.
The facts are simple. The lease guaranty at issue stated in “Paragraph A” that upon the tenant’s default, the guarantor “shall on demand of Landlord fully and promptly pay all Rental and other sums, costs, and charges to be paid by Tenant…” A separate provision in the guaranty, “Paragraph B,” stated: “The Guarantor unconditionally waives…presentment, demand for payment of any sum from the Tenant or any person who has guaranteed in whole or in part any of the obligations guaranteed hereby…”
The tenant defaulted under the lease and the landlord sued the guarantor. The guarantor raised a defense that the landlord never made a demand on the guarantor before suing. The landlord argued that Paragraph B meant that the landlord did not have to make a demand on the guarantor. The trial court ruled for the landlord on that argument. The case went to trial and the guarantor lost.
But on appeal, the guarantor won. The appellate court ruled that the landlord was unable to offer any meaning for Paragraph A if Paragraph B meant that the landlord did not have to make a demand before suing the guarantor. Instead, the appellate court found that Paragraph B meant that the landlord did not have to first demand payment from others (such as the tenant and other guarantors).
The landlord argued that the guarantor fell into the group referenced in Paragraph B. The appellate court rejected that argument because the defined term “Guarantor” was not mentioned in Paragraph B and throughout the agreement the parties used that defined term to refer to the guarantor. The court also found that the context of Paragraph B made the landlord’s interpretation unreasonable.
Ultimately, the decision was based on the exact language of the guaranty. The case does not mean that a landlord must always make a pre-suit demand on a guarantor – just when the guaranty requires it. What the case really means is that the parties must be careful about their drafting (a lesson we’ve covered on this blog over and over and over) and read their agreements once executed.
- Partner
Matt Chait is the Managing Partner of the West Palm Beach office of Shutts & Bowen LLP, where he is a member of the Business Litigation Practice Group. His statewide practice focuses on commercial real estate and land use litigation ...
Search Blog
Follow Us
Recent Posts
- Florida Appellate Court Provides Further Guidance Regarding New Summary Judgment Rule
- SEC Adopts New Cybersecurity Rules
- From 😊 to 💼: Can Emojis Create a Legally Binding Contract?
- HB-3: An Overview of ESG Factors Relating to Public Funds Investment and Financial Industry Impacts
- The Live Local Act Part 2 - Affordable Housing Incentives
- Florida's Live Local Act
- Florida Preliminary Injunctions Must Merely Preserve the Status Quo
- Can a Landlord Obtain Funds Deposited by Tenant in the Court’s Registry?
- Drawn-out negotiations over purchase agreement result in extensive litigation
- In eviction case, trial court wrongly made landlord produce leases with other tenants
Popular Categories
- Litigation
- Contracts
- Landlord-Tenant
- Business
- Litigation (Appellate)
- Supreme Court
- Real Estate Law
- Cyber fraud
- Technology
- Business of Real Estate
- Property Tax
- Development/Land Use
- Cybersecurity
- Data Security
- Conveyances
- Foreclosures
- Estate planning
- Trusts and Estates
- Lease
- Wealth planning
- Business
- Insurance
- Restrictive Covenants
- Title
- Construction
- Promissory Notes
- Regulatory Compliance
- Government
- Creditor's Rights
- Liens and encumbrances
- Compliance
- Americans with Disabilities Act
- Eviction
- Bankruptcy
- Ad Valorem Assessments
- Attorneys' Fees
- Appeals
- Attorneys' Fees
- Employment and Labor
- Litigation (Labor & Employment)
- Small Business
- Mortgages
- Loan guaranties
- Consumer Protection
- Regulation
- Maritime
- GAO
- Commercial Brokerage
- Renewal
- email hacking
- Lis Pendens
- Homestead
- Partnerships and LLCs
- Standing
Editors
- Associate
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Associate
- Partner
- Associate
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Associate
- Partner
- Partner
Archives
- August 2023
- July 2023
- June 2023
- May 2023
- January 2023
- October 2022
- July 2022
- March 2022
- February 2022
- January 2022
- December 2021
- October 2021
- September 2021
- August 2021
- July 2021
- May 2021
- April 2021
- March 2021
- February 2021
- January 2021
- December 2020
- October 2020
- September 2020
- July 2020
- June 2020
- March 2020
- October 2019
- August 2019
- July 2019
- May 2019
- February 2019
- July 2018
- June 2018
- May 2018
- March 2018
- February 2018
- January 2018
- October 2017
- August 2017
- July 2017
- June 2017
- May 2017
- March 2017
- February 2017
- January 2017
- December 2016
- November 2016
- October 2016
- September 2016
- August 2016
- July 2016
- June 2016
- May 2016
- April 2016
- March 2016