Case Name: John P. SHAKESHOBER, Appellant, v. FLORIDA RESORT DEVELOPMENT CORP., a Florida corporation, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1986-08-13
Citations: 492 So. 2d 816
Docket Number: No. 85-1808
Parties: John P. SHAKESHOBER, Appellant, v. FLORIDA RESORT DEVELOPMENT CORP., a Florida corporation, Appellee.
Judges: GUNTHER, J., concurs.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 492
Pages: 816–819

Head Matter:
John P. SHAKESHOBER, Appellant, v. FLORIDA RESORT DEVELOPMENT CORP., a Florida corporation, Appellee.
No. 85-1808.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
Aug. 13, 1986.
Rehearing Denied Sept. 9, 1986.
John P. Wilkes of O’Neal, Booth & Wilkes, Fort Lauderdale, for appellant.
John M. Ross, Fort Lauderdale, for ap-pellee.

Opinion:
STONE, Judge.
The plaintiff-purchaser of a time share unit appeals the measure of damages for breach of contract applied in the final judgment. The developer-vendor was unable to deliver the unit for the time period specified in the contract as it had been erroneously resold. The trial court found, as a fact, that the defendant's inability to close was negligent and was not the result of bad faith.
The measure of general damages in this state, in an action by a vendee against a vendor, in the absence of bad faith, is the return of the deposit plus interest together with any special damages, such as expenses, and, where applicable, the payment of any actual profit made by the seller on the resale. Gassner v. Lockett, 101 So.2d 33 (Fla.1958); Bosso v. Neuner, 426 So.2d 1209 (Fla. 4th DCA), rev. denied, 436 So.2d 100 (Fla.1983). Accord Vogel v. Vandriver, 373 So.2d 366 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979); Horton v. O'Rourke, 321 So.2d 612 (Fla. 2d DCA 1975).
With respect to special damages, no claim was made to the trial court for any expenses, and there was no proof of any specific profit made by the developer. Appellant's claim at all times has been that the measure of damages was his loss of bargain. Appellee has previously refunded appellant his deposit money plus 8% interest.
We conclude that appellant is entitled to payment of interest at 12%, pursuant to section 687.01, Florida Statutes, but has failed to prove any other special damages. Appellant also claims attorney's fees pursuant to section 721.21, Florida Statutes. However, we find that this statute does not apply to the facts of this case.
We therefore reverse and remand with instructions to the trial court to enter judgment for the additional 4% interest.
Affirmed in part, reversed in part and remanded.
GUNTHER, J., concurs.
GLICKSTEIN, J., concurs specially with opinion.