Case ID: so2d_580/html/0894-03.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

NEWPORT MOTEL, INC., Appellant, v. FIVE SEAS INVESTORS, INC., Chrysler Capital Realty, Inc., and Newport Operating Corporation, Appellees.
    No. 90-1521.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
    June 18, 1991.
    Abrams, Anton, Robbins, Resnick & Schneider and Maurice M. Garcia, Hollywood, for appellant.
    Kluger, Peretz, Kaplan & Berlin and Steven I. Peretz; Coll, Davidson, Carter, Smith, Salter & Barkett and Vance E. Salter and Michael J. Higer, Miami, for appel-lees.
    Before FERGUSON, COPE and GODERICH, JJ.
   PER CURIAM.

The plaintiff appeals the trial court’s entry of final summary judgment in favor of the defendants. We affirm.

We agree with the trial court's finding that the lease and the assignment were unambiguous on their face and that no extrinsic evidence need be considered. See McClure v. Painewebber, Inc., 549 So.2d 1157, 1158 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989); Acceleration Nat’l Service Corp. v. Brickell Financial Services Motor Club, Inc., 541 So.2d 738, 739 (Fla. 3d DCA), review denied, 548 So.2d 662 (Fla.1989). That being so, the trial court was faced with a question of law and summary final judgment was properly entered in favor of the defendants.

Affirmed.