Case Name: Donald L. BERG, etc., Appellant, v. Julio C. CAPO, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 2007-11-14
Citations: 994 So. 2d 322
Docket Number: Nos. 3D05-2004, 3D05-1354
Parties: Donald L. BERG, etc., Appellant, v. Julio C. CAPO, Appellee.
Judges: Before WELLS, SHEPHERD, and ROTHENBERG, JJ.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 994
Pages: 322–329

Head Matter:
Donald L. BERG, etc., Appellant, v. Julio C. CAPO, Appellee.
Nos. 3D05-2004, 3D05-1354.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
Nov. 14, 2007.
Rehearing and Rehearing En Banc Denied Nov. 6, 2008.
Jorden Burt and Jeffrey B. Crockett; Lauri Waldman Ross, Miami, for appellant.
Holland & Knight and Rodolfo Sorondo, Jr., and Christopher N. Bellows, Miami, for appellee.
Before WELLS, SHEPHERD, and ROTHENBERG, JJ.

Opinion:
WELLS, Judge.
Donald L. Berg appeals from summary judgments granted in Julio Capo's favor on claims sounding in breach of fiduciary duty, fraud, declaratory judgment, securities fraud, and rescission relating to a stock purchase agreement executed by the parties on January 21, 1999. Because that agreement contains both an integration clause and a clause mutually releasing Berg and Julio Capo "from any and all claims, demands, charges, impositions, damages, collections, etc., of any type or description, arising out of any and all acts, deeds, contracts, undertakings, representations, or any other thing, of any type or description," the judgments in Julio Capo's favor must be affirmed.
Berg nevertheless maintains that he is entitled to rescind the January 21 agreement (and therefore secure reversal on his other claims) not because of the fraud he actually alleged in his complaint as the basis for setting aside this agreement, but because Berg's attorney, Sidney Brodie, also represented Julio's cousin, Gerry Capo, and was part of a conspiracy to benefit Gerry via this agreement between Julio and Berg. Unfortunately for Berg, no conspiracy is alleged in his complaint, nor was this conspiracy/dual representation theory asserted as a basis for setting aside this agreement. Moreover, no dual representation or conflict was demonstrated. It is undisputed that Berg gave a power of attorney to Gerry Capo to act on his behalf in this transaction. Both Berg and Gerry were represented by the same attorney, thus creating no conflict. It is also undisputed that Julio was represented by someone else. Again, there was no dual representation or conflict. The January 21, 1999 agreement and its release therefore stand and bar Berg's claims regarding this transaction.
The judgments on appeal are, therefore, affirmed.
SHEPHERD, J., concurs.
. We consolidated the appeals from these judgments with Berg's appeal from a judgment in Julio Capo's favor on his counterclaim for breach of contract and to collect on a note.