Court Opinion

ID: 9374003
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-02-22 16:13:22.412986+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:16:44.145846
License: Public Domain

Third District Court of Appeal
                               State of Florida

                       Opinion filed February 22, 2023.
       Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
                             ________________

                             No. 3D21-2367
                        Lower Tribunal No. 20-6945
                           ________________

                      Pershing Industries, Inc.,
                                  Appellant,

                                     vs.

                StoneMor Florida Subsidiary, LLC,
                                  Appellee.

      An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Antonio
Arzola, Judge.

      Robert H. Yaffe, P.A., and Robert H. Yaffe; Shutts & Bowen LLP, and
Douglas M. Kramer; Shutts & Bowen LLP, and Daniel Nordby (Tallahassee),
for appellant.

     Duane Morris LLP, and Kevin E. Vance (Boca Raton); Duane Morris
LLP, and Richard D. Shane, for appellee.

Before LOGUE, MILLER, and BOKOR, JJ.

     PER CURIAM.

     Having carefully reviewed the language of the contract at issue under

traditional rules of interpretation, Hahamovitch v. Hahamovitch, 174 So. 3d
983, 986 (Fla. 2015) (“Where a contract is clear and unambiguous, it must

be enforced pursuant to its plain language.”); Kel Homes, LLC v. Burris, 933

So. 2d 699, 703 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006) (“[T]he use of different terms in

paragraphs 24 and 28 tends to indicate that a different meaning was

intended. As a general proposition, the use of different language in different

contractual provisions strongly implies that a different meaning was

intended.”), we affirm the trial court’s well-reasoned order granting summary

judgment for Appellee.

                                      2