Case ID: so2d_462/html/0028-03.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

Bernard KANDEL and Jacqueline E. Kandel, Appellants, v. COMEAU BUILDING, INC., et al., Appellees.
    No. 84-116.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
    Dec. 12, 1984.
    Rehearing and Clarification Denied Feb. 5, 1985.
    John B. Powell of Powell, Tennyson & St. John, P.A., West Palm Beach, for appellants.
    
      Moira K. Lasch of Baskin & Steingut, and Richard L. Martens of Boose, Ciklin & Martens, West Palm Beach, for appellees.
   PER CURIAM.

We are of the opinion that the defendants, Bernard Kandel and Jacqueline E. Kandel, even though denominated as sub-lessees, were given an option to renew the lease in question by the lessor, which renewal option was reflected by Addendum No. 2 dated November 12,1980. Moreover, it clearly appears that the Kandels validly exercised their option and are entitled to its benefits.

The judgment on appeal is

REVERSED.

LETTS, DELL and WALDEN, JJ., concur.