Any Florida Lawyers available?

[83911sc]

OK, I know that this is not even remotely porsche related, but I've got a quick legal question that I could realy use some help on. I'm a NJ lawyer tring to help out a friend in FL w/ a new home purchase. I could easily answer the Q in NJ, but I don't know the answer for FL - I would really appreciate a quick reply if someone can answer this question -

On a residential real estate transaction with a mortgage contingency that provides that the Buyer has until the time of closing ro "meet the terms of the commitment", does the Seller have the right to terminate the contract on the basis of failing to provide an "unconditional committment"? The contract does not indicate that an uncoditional commitment is required at any point, and specifically provides for the Buyer to meet the terms anytime prior to closing.

Please provide specific statutory or case law authority on this issue if available.

Thanks for you help.

Adam

[sammyg2]

(sorry in advance to all lawyers out there, couldn't help myself :-)

I don't know about Florida, but we have a whole bunch of them in California we would be willing to send your way.

[Jim T]

I think one would need some more information.

You give only two facts, which are not necessarily related. # 1 deals with the *timing* of meeting the "commitment." #2 deals with the *nature* of the "commitment."

The "timing" issue that you isn't really relevant - because that comes into play only once the "commitment" is defined - which has not yet occured. What timing issue *is* relevant is the issue of how long the buyer has to provide the "commitment" before the seller can terminate.

I'm not sure one could give an answer without more information (I'm not sure because I'm not completely familiar with Fl law - but my sense is that more info would be needed).

Anyways, I'm not a Fl lawyer, but I think I could find the answer if I had the contract, using free legal resources available on the Internet. I'm not going to do that, but you could give it a shot.

[silverc4s]

So, is this thread off topic, or what???

At the prices that you lawyers charge people, why are you using our free bandwidth to do your work..

Besides, i thought all of the lawyers were busy getting ready to hang out a polling places next week to make sure that the remainder of their self-interests are well served...

NOT..

[Joe Bob]

Why does Florida have more scummy leech filled swamps than California has lawyers?

Florida had first choice.....

[avi8torny]

I have no info on case law regarding contingencies in Fla. real estate contracts but I do have the notes on the recent decision from the United States District Court, Southwestern District, Tempe, Arizona relating to Case No. B19294, Judge Joan Kujava, Presiding

Wile E. Coyote, Plaintiff vs. Acme Company, Defendant

Opening Statement of Mr. Harold Schoff, attorney for Mr. Coyote, a resident of Arizona and contiguous states, does hereby bring suit for damages against the Acme Company, manufacturer and retail distributor of assorted merchandise, incorporated in Delaware and doing business in every state, district, and territory. Mr. Coyote seeks compensation for personal injuries, loss of business income, and mental suffering caused as a direct result of the actions and/or gross negligence of said company under Title 15 of the United States Code, Chapter 47, section 2072 subsection (a), relating to product liability.

Mr. Coyote states that on eight-five separate occasions he has purchased of the Acme Company (hereinafter, "Defendant"), through that company's mail-order department, certain products which did cause him bodily injury due to defects in manufacture or improper cautionary labeling. Sales slips made out to Mr. Coyote as proof of purchase are at present in the possession of the Court, marked Exhibit A. Such injuries sustained by Mr. Coyote have temporarily restricted his ability to make a living in his profession of predator. Mr. Coyote is self-employed and thus not eligible for Workman's Compensation.

Mr. Coyote states that on December 13th he received of Defendant via parcel post one Acme Rocket Sled. The intention of Mr. Coyote was to use the Rocket Sled to aid him in the pursuit of his prey. Upon receipt of the Rocket Sled, Mr. Coyote removed it from its wooden shipping crate and sighting his prey, activated the ignition Mr. Coyote gripped the handlebars, the Rocket Sled accelerated with such sudden and precipitate force as to stretch Mr. Coyote's forelimbs to a length of fifty feet. Subsequently, the rest of Mr. Coyote's body shot forward with a violent jolt, causing severe strain to his back and neck and placing him unexpectedly astride the Rocket Sled. Disappearing over the horizon at such speed as to leave a diminishing jet trail along its path, the Rocket Sled soon brought Mr. Coyote abreast of his prey. At that moment the animal he was pursuing veered sharply to the right. Mr. Coyote vigorously attempted to follow this maneuver but was unable to, due to poorly designed steering on the Rocket Sled and a faulty or nonexistent braking system. Shortly thereafter, the unchecked progress of the Rocket Sled brought it and Mr. Coyote into collision with the side of a mesa.

[Tim Walsh]

LOL!!!

[silverc4s]

83911SC,
You can look here http://www.nolo.com/humor/jokes.cfm

Probably get some help with your problem...

[83911sc]

Jim - thanks for your reply - the timing of the Buyer providing the committment was ok per the contract, the issue (better stated) is whether promptly providing a commitment which contains conditions that the borrower must satisfy in order for the mortgage company to lend the money is sufficient under FL law to keep the contract in force. (i.e. in NJ, as decided by case law, once a committment is issued, with our without conditions, the contingency is satisfied, and the contract is therefore enforceable w/o this contingency). I was looking for some one who happened to know this same answer in FL off the top of their head and could point me in that direction so I could help a friend out as a courtesy. I appreciate your input and I'm with you about not going too deep in trying to point someone on the right direction - I think I draw the same line as you; knowledge off the top of the head is easy game, but I'm not going off on a 2 hour quest, and would never ask someone else to either

avi8torny - that was great, especially since I'm primarily a PI lawyer - one of the better ones that I've heard.

Bill - Sorry if you're not happy with a lawyer trying to help someone for free by posting a question here, but let's keep in mind that this BB pretty much is just that - trying to help others in a "community". I'm sure that you are happy when someone shares their knowledge (automotive, legal or otherwise) with you gratis. I know the post is off topic - that's the first thing that I said by way of recognition. People get lots of good advice here - most of the times about their cars, sometimes about off topic stuff. I know that I've helped people here with legal questions and I've received a great deal of info about my car and related issues. If what makes you mad is that its a legal issue posted by a lawyer - well, just think how appreciative you would be if your lawyer tried to treat you as a client so fairly and without charge. As a profession, attorneys bear the brunt of insults and criticisms, but if you have been or are ever in position to need the services of an attorney, and you happen to select a really good one, your apparent disdain may be washed away with appreciation. Good experiences with lawyers really do happen!

Wayne - its off topic - sorry, my fault. Although I know that I have personally helped others with legal (non-porsche) related issues from this site, I will avoid such topics in the future. Its your board; your call. No offence intended or taken.

Catch ya later -

Adam

[overkill]

But isn't forum called Off Topic Discussions? You know we can't always talk about porsche you know. You know, one day people aren't going to show up to talk anymore. Whats the big deal? I dont understand people.