Stock Building Supply of Florida, Inc. v. Soares Da Costa Construction Services, LLC
76 So. 3d 313
| Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | 2011Background
- Soares Da Costa contracted with Panterra Development to build a Miami mixed-use project, with Contract Management Services as a related entity owning 40% and providing the subcontract for structural shell.
- K & A Lumber supplied rebar under the orders of Contract Management and other miscellaneous materials under Soares Da Costa’s order; notices to owner were served in September 2005.
- The project ceased in January 2006 for funding, with liens recorded by K & A and later satisfied by the Owner in March 2006; K & A executed a Satisfaction and Waiver for the lien tied to Contract Management’s order.
- In March 2006, a new Notice of Commencement and a new bond with Westchester Fire were recorded, and the project recommenced in April 2006 under a new framework.
- K & A then supplied rebar again under Contract Management’s order and miscellaneous materials under Soares Da Costa’s order; K & A failed to issue a new Notice to Owner/Contractor for the rebar supplied under Contract Management after recommencement.
- K & A filed suit on the payment bond; the trial court held K & A was not in privity with Soares Da Costa and failed to serve proper notices, barring claims against Soares Da Costa and Westchester Fire, while allowing recovery against Contract Management.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the First Notice satisfied 713.23(1)(c) or only 713.06 | K & A contends the First Notice sufficed to cover all rebar materials under 713.23. | Soares Da Costa/Westchester Fire argue the First Notice created a 713.06 lien and that 713.23 requirements apply only to post-bond liens; recommencement required new notices. | First Notice created a 713.06 lien; 713.23 not applicable to pre-bond work. |
| Did K & A need a new Notice to Contractor for the rebar after recommencement | Second Notice should cover materials furnished after recommencement under 713.23(1)(c). | Second Notice incorrectly described the order as Soares Da Costa’s rather than Contract Management’s; failed to satisfy 713.23(1)(c). | K & A failed to provide proper 713.23 notices after recommencement; authority requires a new notice for bonded work. |
| Effect of waiver/release of the pre-bond lien | Waiver released the pre-bond lien on the portion billed to Contract Management. | Waiver does not bar post-recommencement claims tied to the new notices and bond. | Waiver disposed of the pre-bond lien; post-recommencement rights still governed by new notices and bond. |
| Whether termination and restart of the Notice of Commencement renewed lien rights requiring new notices | Termination of the old commencement and restart with a new commencement should reset notice requirements for post-restart materials. | Old notices and bonds may be relevant if proper notices were still in effect. | Restart with a new Notice of Commencement requires new notices for post-restart materials. |
| Overall liability against Soares Da Costa and Westchester Fire on the payment bond | K & A should recover against the bond for materials supplied. | Without proper notices under 713.23, K & A’s claims on the bond fail; the court should deny recovery against the bond. | Affirmed judgment denying recovery against Soares Da Costa and Westchester Fire due to improper notices. |
Key Cases Cited
- Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. Buck, 594 So. 2d 280 (Fla. 1992) (strict construction of construction liens and related notice requirements)
- Design Aluminum, Inc. v. DeSanti, 521 So.2d 285 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988) (notice of commencement details and lien priority)
- Bishop v. James A. Knowles, Inc., 292 So.2d 415 (Fla. 2d DCA 1974) (statutory intent of 713.23(1)(c) to protect owner from mispayments)
- Professional Plastering & Stucco, Inc. v. Bridgeport-Strasberg Joint Venture, 940 So.2d 444 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006) (subcontractor must comply with notice requirements even if owner/contractor breached others)