County
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
IN AND
APPELLATE DIVISION
LONG QIN LU and XIAO FENG ZHENG,
Appellants,
vs.
Appeal No.05-0061AP-88B
UCN522005AP000061XXXXCV
STEWART TITLE OF PINELLAS, INC.,
JOHN C. SHUBERT, JR., and LISA SHUBERT,
Appellees.
________________________________________/
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,[1]
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.
DONE AND
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
1490 –
Richard M. Georges, Esquire
Post Office Box 14545