Posik v Layton

Posik v Layton

Posik v. Layton
695 So.2d 759
Fla.App. 5 Dist.,1997.
March 27, 1997

Facts
Dr. Layton was a doctor that decided to move her practice to Brevard County. She had convinced her lover; Ms. Posik.   Dr. Layton used a contract to persuade Ms. Posik to move with her. The contract resembled a nuptial agreement. The contracted stated that Dr. Layton would provide all the support for the both of them and make a will leaving Ms. Posik her entire estate. Also, Ms.Posik agreed to lend $20,000 to Dr. Layton. The contract stated that Dr. Layton would breach the contract by not providing for Ms. Posik, or if Dr.Layton notified her in writing to leave or brought a third party to live at the residence for a period longer than 4 weeks without her consent. Last but not least, if Dr.Layton abused or harassed or made the living arrangements intolerable. In such case, Dr. Layton agreed to pay liquidated damages in the amount of $2,500 a month for the rest of Ms.Posik’s life. Four years later, Dr. Layton served Ms. Posik a 3 day eviction because she had found another partner in which she wanted to live with. Ms. Posik moved out and Dr. Layton moved in her new partner. Finally, Ms.Posik sued for the breach of contract and to collect on the note.

Issue
Should an agreement between two homosexuals for support be valid although not married?

Rule
Lowry v. Lowry, 512 So.2d 1142 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987) “the law of   FL creates no legal rights or duties between live-ins.”

Crossen v. Feldman, 673 So.2d 903 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996) Whether parties entered into a contract which they were capable of?

Statute of Frauds

Application
Since this agreement met the requirements for the Statute of Frauds and any nuptial like agreement should be in writing like this agreement was, the agreement is valid. Individuals have the right to either will their property as they see fit and privately commit by contract to spend their money as they choose. The State recognizes their...