In Hourglass Entertainment, LLC v. NRG Investments, Inc., the Florida Second District Court of Appeal ruled on July 16, 2025, that a commercial landlord was not entitled to recover future, unaccrued rent under a lease that lacked a rent acceleration clause. This case serves as an important reminder for commercial landlords to clearly specify their remedies in lease agreements and reinforces statutory limitations for residential leases.

Case Background

Hourglass Entertainment, LLC, along with two individual guarantors, entered into two commercial leases with NRG Investments—one for a building unit and another for adjacent parking lot space used to operate a food truck. The parking lot lease began in September 2019 with a five-year term, set to expire in August 2024. However, Hourglass ceased paying rent in April 2021, prompting NRG to sue for breach of both leases.

Following a judge trial, the trial court awarded NRG damages, including rent through the end of the lease term. Specifically, for the parking lot lease, the court awarded approximately $39,858, which included about four months of rent that had not yet accrued at the time of the judgment in April 2024.

Appellate Court Ruling

The appellate court affirmed the damages under the building lease but reversed the portion of the judgment awarding future rent for the parking lot lease. The court emphasized that under Florida law, future rent may only be recovered in a lump sum if the lease contains an express acceleration clause. The parking lot lease contained no such provision.

Quoting long-standing Florida precedent, the court explained that absent an acceleration clause, future rent is only demandable “in the amounts and at the time specified in the lease”. The landlord may not recover unaccrued rent without a contractual basis, regardless of whether it takes possession for its own use or on behalf of the tenant.

Additionally, the court noted that when a landlord elects to relet the premises on the tenant’s behalf, it must attempt to mitigate damages and can only recover the difference between the contract rent and what it was able to relet the property for. Awarding unaccrued rent in such a scenario would presume no mitigation would occur, which contradicts the legal duty to mitigate and effectively grants acceleration without agreement.

Lessons for Commercial Landlords

1. Include an Acceleration Clause – If landlords want the ability to demand future rent upon tenant default, the lease must contain an express provision permitting acceleration of rent.
2. Specify Remedies Clearly – Leases should unambiguously define the landlord’s remedies in the event of default to avoid litigation risks and unenforceable awards.
3. Understand Mitigation Duties – When landlords relet a property on a breaching tenant’s behalf, they must act in good faith to mitigate losses and cannot automatically recover full rent for the remaining term.

Special Note for Residential Landlords

Under Florida Statutes § 83.595, residential landlords are limited to specific remedies upon tenant default, none of which allow for rent acceleration. Residential landlords must either retake possession for their own use, retake possession for the tenant’s account and mitigate damages, or do nothing and demand rent on the tenant as it becomes due. Landlords cannot pursue future rent in a lump sum under any circumstances.

This case reinforces the need for careful lease drafting and adherence to Florida law to preserve enforceable remedies and avoid costly reversals.