Civil Court: APPELLATE PROCEDURE – Preservation of Error – no transcript - Appellants/Buyers
are unable to demonstrate that trial court erred in entering judgment in favor
of Appellees/Sellers for the return of earnest money - Final Judgment affirmed.
Long Qin Lu v. Stewart Title of Pinellas,
Inc., Appeal No. 05-0061AP-88B (
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE SIXTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
LONG QIN LU and XIAO FENG ZHENG,
vs. Appeal No.05-0061AP-88B
STEWART TITLE OF PINELLAS, INC.,
JOHN C. SHUBERT, JR., and LISA SHUBERT,
Appeal from Final Judgment
Judge Henry J. Andringa
ORDER AND OPINION
THIS CAUSE came before the Court on appeal, filed by Long Qin Lu and Xiao Feng Zheng, from the Final Judgment, entered July 8, 2005, in favor of Stewart Title of Pinellas, Inc., John C. Shubert, Jr., and Lisa Shubert. Upon review of the Initial Brief, the record and being otherwise fully advised, the Court affirms the trial court’s ruling as set forth below.
The record shows that on September 13, 2004, Stewart Title filed a Complaint for Interpleader to determine the rights of John C. Shubert, Lisa Shubert (Sellers), Long Qin Lu, and Xias Fung Zheng (Buyers), after a dispute arose under a contract to purchase real property. Both the Sellers and the Buyers sought the return of $ 2,000.00, earnest money held in escrow by Stewart Title. The Buyers answered the complaint and filed a cross-claim again the Sellers arguing that the contract was unenforceable due to material changes made by the Sellers, numerous property deficiencies, and the Buyers inability to obtain financing. The Sellers answered the complaint and filed a response to the Buyers’ cross-claim arguing that they were entitled to the $ 2,000.00, as the Buyers had accepted the terms of the contract and were approved for financing. After a trial, the lower court entered Final Judgment in favor of the Sellers.
On appeal, the Appellants argue that
the trial court erred in entering judgment in favor of the Sellers. In reviewing this issue, the trial court’s
interpretation of a contract is a matter of law subject to a de novo standard
of review. See Jenkins v.
Eckerd Corporation, 913 So.2d 43, 49 (
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Final Judgment is affirmed.
ORDERED in Chambers, at
DAVID A. DEMERS
Circuit Judge, Appellate Division
PETER RAMSBERGER ANTHONY RONDOLINO
Circuit Judge, Appellate Division Circuit Judge, Appellate Division
Copies furnished to:
Judge Henry J. Andringa
Long Qin Lu and Xiao Feng Zheng
John and Lisa Shubert
Richard M. Georges, Esquire
Post Office Box 14545
 The Appellees failed to file an Answer Brief.