GARY C. LINDROS v. LEE F. BACKUS and CICILY BACKUS, his wife and MARJORIE BACKUS
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA GARY C. LINDROS, NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED Appellant, v. CASE NO. 1D02-822 LEE F. BACKUS and CICILY BACKUS, his wife, and MARJORIE BACKUS, Appellees. / Opinion filed June 26, 2003. An appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County. Honorable Bernard Nachman, Judge. Robert Skeels, Esquire, Jacksonville; Michael J. Korn, Korn & Zehmer, P. A., Jacksonville, for Appellant. J. Michael Lindell, Esquire, and Karen E. Wendzel, Esquire, of Lindell & Kellison, P. A., Jackonville, for Appellees. PER CURIAM. Appellant Gary C. Lindros brought an action for specific performance of a contract for the purchase of an oceanfront condominium. At the conclusion of Appellant s case in chief, the trial court granted Appellees motion for dismissal on the basis that the plaintiff s proofs failed to satisfy the requirements of the Statute of Frauds, ยง 725.01, Florida Statutes, in that the plaintiff failed to show that the defendants signed the documents alleged to constitute such a contract, or the plaintiff failed to show that defendants names were signed thereto by a person authorized to sign their names for them. We agree with Appellant that the trial court erred as a matter of law, and therefore reverse. We hold that the aggregated documents in the record, including an extension agreement signed by Appellant and Appellee Marjorie Backus after a power of attorney was executed authorizing her to sell the condominium, satisfy the requirements of section 725.01, Florida Statutes. See Heffernan v. Keith, 127 So. 2d 903 (Fla. 3d DCA 1961)(holding that a telegram, together with other documents, constituted a sufficient memorandum to satisfy the statute of frauds for the sale of land). REVERSED and REMANDED for further proceedings. WEBSTER, PADOVANO and POLSTON, JJ., concur. 2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
