Case Name: Constance ROBERTS, Appellant, v. Joshua LLOYD and Steve Edwards, Inc., d/b/a Mercedeshowroom and Phoenix American Warranty Company, Inc., d/b/a Phoenix American, Appellees
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1997-05-07
Citations: 695 So. 2d 400
Docket Number: No. 96-2489
Parties: Constance ROBERTS, Appellant, v. Joshua LLOYD and Steve Edwards, Inc., d/b/a Mercedeshowroom and Phoenix American Warranty Company, Inc., d/b/a Phoenix American, Appellees.
Judges: STONE, WARNER and POLEN, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 695
Pages: 400–400

Head Matter:
Constance ROBERTS, Appellant, v. Joshua LLOYD and Steve Edwards, Inc., d/b/a Mercedeshowroom and Phoenix American Warranty Company, Inc., d/b/a Phoenix American, Appellees.
No. 96-2489.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
May 7, 1997.
Jerard C. Heller, Fort Lauderdale, for appellant.
David M. Tarlow of Spencer & Klein, P.A., Miami, for Appellee-Phoenix American Warranty Company.
David H. Brodie of Mandel, Simowitz, Weisman, Kirschner & Diaz, P.A., Boca Ra-ton, for Appellee-Steve Edward, Inc. d/b/a Mercedeshowroom.

Opinion:
ON MOTION FOR REHEARING
PER CURIAM.
The motion for rehearing based on conflict with Passerrello v. Robert L. Lipton, Inc., collectively, d/b/a Lipton Toyota, Capital Bank, 690 So.2d 610 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997), is denied. In Passerrello, the third party who was seeking to arbitrate under the sales agreement between the buyer and seller was the bank that financed the purchase. While the bank was not a party to the sales contract, the contract stated that it would not take effect until it was approved by the bank, and further stated that the bank was entitled to assert any claims or defenses which the buyer could assert. That language was sufficient to support the panel's finding that the bank was an intended beneficiary of the sales agreement and the arbitration clause contained therein.
In the instant case, as the original opinion noted, there was no evidence that Phoenix American was an intended beneficiary of the contract containing the arbitration clause.
STONE, WARNER and POLEN, JJ., concur.