Affirmed. See Cahill v. Regan, 5 N.Y.2d 292, 184 N.Y.S.2d 348, 157 N.E.2d 505 (N.Y. 1959) (holding that, in construing the meaning and coverage of a general release, the court must consider the controversy being settled and the purpose for which the release was actually given); Glassberg v. Lee, 82 A.D.3d 836, 918 N.Y.S.2d 554, 555 (2011) (holding: "While the meaning and scope of a release are determined within the context of the controversy being settled, a release cannot be read to cover matters which the parties did not intend to dispose of, and unless it is shown that a specified matter was in dispute at the time a purported release was given, it cannot be held to bar the releasor's rights as to that matter") (internal citations omitted); Wild v. Finger Lakes Racing Ass'n, 191 A.D.2d 995, 595 N.Y.S.2d 590, 591 (1993) (holding that "the law will not infer an intent for a party to release all persons, known and unknown, from all claims").
Regions Bank v. Am. Leisure Resorts, Inc., 239 So. 3d 764 (2018)
March 7, 2018
·
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
·
Nos. 3D16–2538
239 So. 3d 764
REGIONS BANK, etc., Appellant,
v.
AMERICAN LEISURE RESORTS, INC., et al., Appellees.
Nos. 3D16-2538
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
Opinion filed March 7, 2018
Garbett, Allen & Roza, P.A. and Philip A. Allen, III, David S. Garbett and Brian P. Yates, Miami, for appellant.
León Cosgrove, LLC, Coral Gables and James R. Bryan, Miami, Scott B. Cosgrove, Coral Gables and Jordi C. Martinez-Cid ; Marcos D. Jimenez, P.A., and Marcos Daniel Jimenez ; Ross & Girten, and Lauri Waldman Ross, Miami, for appellee CDR Créances, S.A.S.
Before SALTER, EMAS and FERNANDEZ, JJ.