Florida/Georgia Personal Injury & Workers Compensation

...Additionally, the qualifying agent is responsible for supervising, directing, managing, and controlling both the corporation's contracting and construction activities. See §§ 489.105(4), .1195, Fla. Stat. (1991). [2] § 713.31, Fla. Stat. (1991). [3] § 553.84, Fla....

...tion of a legislative policy to expand remedies are never barred by the economic loss rule. In Comptech Int'l, Inc. v. Milam Commerce Park, Ltd., 753 So.2d 1219 (Fla.1999), when reviewing a statutory cause of action under the Southern Building Code, section 553.84, Florida Statutes (1995), the Florida Supreme Court held that the economic loss rule cannot be used to eliminate a statutory cause of action....

...5th DCA 1998), which expressly and directly conflict with each other. We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(3), Fla. Const. We quash the Third District's decision in Comptech because the economic loss rule [2] does not preclude a statutory cause of action under the Southern Building Code, section 553.84, Florida Statutes (1995), and because the computers that were damaged during the renovations of the warehouse meet the definition of "other property" under the exception to the economic loss rule. We approve the Fifth District's decision in Stallings, holding the economic loss rule does not preclude a homeowner's claim against a subcontractor for violation of section 553.84, Florida Statutes (1995)....

...the computers located in the warehouse. In addition, the landlord failed to obtain the required building permits for the building addition. Comptech sued Milam for: (1) negligent selection of contractor; (2) negligent construction; (3) violation of section 553.84; and (4) return of illegally collected rent. The Third District held the negligence claims were barred by the economic loss rule, despite the statutory duty created by section 553.84....

...he opines that the economic loss rule cannot be used to eliminate a statutory cause of action. Id. This, he says, is particularly true where the statute states that it is applicable "[n]otwithstanding any other remedies." The statute at issue here, section 553.84, provides: Statutory Civil Action.— Notwithstanding any other remedies available, any person or party, in an individual capacity or on behalf of a class of persons or parties, damaged as a result of a violation of this part or the Sta...

...cy pronouncement and to eliminate the enforcement of those remedies. Delgado, 693 So.2d at 609. Similarly, in Stallings v. Kennedy Electric, Inc., 710 So.2d 195 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998), the Fifth District addressed the dismissal of a claim brought under section 553.84, Florida Statutes (1995), based on the economic loss rule....

...edy Electric v. Stallings In Stallings v. Kennedy Electric, Inc., 710 So.2d 195 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998), the trial court dismissed Stallings' fourth amended complaint, which contained counts for negligence, negligence per se, and statutory damages under section 553.84, Florida Statutes (1995)....

...ruction of the Stallings' home. The Stallings alleged the wiring was faulty and caused two fires. The trial court dismissed all three causes of action based on the economic loss rule. [10] The Fifth District reversed the dismissal of the count under section 553.84, holding the economic loss rule does not apply to statutory causes of action....

...e is available "notwithstanding any other civil remedies available." The judicially created economic loss rule cannot abrogate this statutory cause of action. We therefore approve the Fifth District's determination that a cause of action pursuant to section 553.84 is not precluded by the economic loss rule....

...Southern Bell Telephone & Telegraph Co., 515 So.2d 180 (Fla.1987). PARIENTE and LEWIS, JJ., concur. NOTES [1] On September 17, 1997, the Third District issued an opinion which held that the economic loss rule did not permit Comptech, the lessee, to sue Milam, the lessor, for damages under section 553.84, Florida Statutes (1995), and that its tort action for damages for negligent construction did not fall under the "other property" exception to the economic loss rule....

...Delgado, 693 So.2d 602, 609 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1997)(economic loss rule does not limit claims under the Florida Deceptive And Unfair Trade Practices Act ("FDUTPA")); Stallings v. Kennedy Electric, Inc., 710 So.2d 195 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1998)(economic loss rule does not limit claims under Fla. Stat. § 553.84)....

...denied, 451 So.2d 850 (Fla.1984)("It is axiomatic that an insurer's duty to defend is determined by the allegations of the complaint filed by a third party against the insured."). The condominium association's complaint stated claims against the developer for breach of implied warranty, negligence, violation of section 553.84, Florida Statutes, and strict liability....

...rdict. The Association filed, but did not pursue, a cross-appeal. Because of the verdict form submitted to the jury, we are unable to determine if the jury found that Seibert was responsible because he committed professional negligence or because of section 553.84, Florida Statutes (1979), which provides a cause of action to anyone damaged as a result of a violation of an approved building code....

...l contractor and the qualifying agent on the project (collectively, Ramsay), and Continuum for damages resulting from the alleged defects. In sum, appellant claimed breaches of warranties, negligence, and violation of the Florida Building Codes Act, Section 553.84, Florida Statutes (1987), and sought to recover the costs of bringing the building into compliance with all building codes and regulations....

...ction), review denied, 669 So.2d 252 (Fla.1996) with Comptech Int'l, Inc. v. Milam Commerce Park, Ltd., 22 Fla. L. Weekly D2192, D2192-93, ___ So.2d ___, ___ (Fla. 3d DCA Sept. 17, 1997) (applying economic loss rule to preclude cause of action under section 553.84, Florida Statutes).

...Statutory Claim In its complaint, Monopoly alleged that Cape Coral Plumbing had a duty to perform its work in compliance with standard building codes pursuant to section 553.04, Florida Statutes (2000), and that Monopoly is entitled to damages under section 553.84. In its first opinion letter, the trial court acknowledged that "nothing was mentioned about" this point but that the trial court did not believe that section 553.84 applies to a general contractor's claim against a subcontractor. In its order granting summary judgment on this claim, the trial court concluded that section *64 553.84 was intended for the protection of homeowners and that Monopoly did not have standing as a contractor....

...In ruling on a motion for summary judgment, the trial court is limited to the grounds raised in the motion. See Boucher v. First Cmty. Bank, 626 So.2d 979, 982 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993). The record indicates that in its first motion for summary judgment, Cape Coral Plumbing did not argue that section 553.84 did not apply to Monopoly....

...Once the trial court raised the issue in its first opinion letter, Cape Coral Plumbing addressed the issue in a memorandum of law. Under these circumstances, this point was not properly presented by Cape Coral Plumbing as a basis for summary judgment. Even if the issue of Monopoly's standing under section 553.84 had been properly presented, the relevant statutory provisions show that the point is without merit. Section 553.84, entitled "Statutory civil action," provides that "any person or party, in an individual capacity or on behalf of a class of persons or parties, damaged as a result of a violation of this part or the State Minimum Building Codes, has a cause of action ......

..." includes "individuals, children, firms, associations, joint adventures, partnerships, estates, trusts, business trusts, syndicates, fiduciaries, corporations, and all other groups or combinations." § 1.01, Fla. Stat. (2000). The plain language of section 553.84 is clear; therefore, it is unnecessary to resort to the rules of statutory construction....

...As to the remaining appellees, however, we conclude that summary judgment was properly entered because of the immunity conferred by section 440.11(1), Florida Statutes (1997) of the Worker's Compensation Law. [7] A. In doing so, we first reject the plaintiffs claim that section 553.84, Florida Statutes (1997), which creates a cause of action for violations of the State Minimum Building Codes, [8] such as were claimed in this case, overcomes or "trumps" the effect of section 440.11....

...Pafford Oil Co., Inc., 697 So.2d 524 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997): "Florida courts have held that the economic loss rule can be applied to statutory actions, but this line of cases appears to be limited to actions that could be characterized as statutory torts." Section 553.84 is a statutory tort....

...Thus the statutory tort claim is subsumed by the ELR because the economic losses sought are no different from those that could have been asserted in a contract action for breach of the lease agreement. See Sarkis v. Pafford Oil Co., Inc., 697 So.2d at 524. The dissent argues to the contrary quoting the language in Section 553.84 which provides a cause of action against the party committing a violation "notwithstanding any other remedies." According to the dissent, this language constitutes a statutory mandate eliminating application of the ELR to the statutory cause of action....

...The second question is whether the economic loss doctrine abolishes the statutory cause of action for violation of the building code. A. As already stated, the landlord did the building addition without pulling the required permits. The Legislature has enacted section 553.84, Florida Statutes (1989), which states: 553.84 Statutory civil action.-- Notwithstanding any other remedies available, any person or party, in an individual capacity or on behalf of a class of persons or parties, damaged as a result of a violation of this part or the State Minimum Building...

...inst the person or party who committed the violation. (Emphasis added). The statute provides a cause of action where defendant has injured plaintiff by violating the building code or doing construction without the required building permit. See Id. §§ 553.84,.79....

...The statute says the exact opposite of what the majority opinion claims. The statute begins: " Notwithstanding any other remedies available, any ... party ... damaged as a result of a violation ... has a cause of action ... against the ... party who committed the violation." § 553.84, Fla. Stat. "Notwithstanding any other remedies" means "notwithstanding any other remedies"—including a contract remedy. The Legislature has plainly said that a litigant can sue under section 553.84 in addition to any other remedies the litigant may have....

...In virtually every case, the homeowner who builds a house or rebuilds after a hurricane or adds a room addition does so under a written contract. The same is true for a commercial business. As a practical matter, the majority eliminates the statutory cause of action under section 553.84....

...The economic loss doctrine cannot be invoked to bar a statutory cause of action. [15] That is particularly so where, as in this case, the statute expressly declares that the statutory cause of action will exist "[n]otwithstanding any other remedies available," § 553.84, Fla. Stat., and consequently will exist even though the plaintiff also has a breach of contract remedy. The plaintiff's claim under section 553.84 is not barred by the economic loss doctrine....

...For the stated reasons, the summary final judgment should be reversed. NOTES [1] Comptech's third amended complaint contained a count asserting that Milam failed to comply with the South Florida Building Code by failing to hire licensed contractors and failing to obtain required permits and inspections. Section 553.84, Florida Statutes (1989), provides that "any person or party ......

...In contrast to the dissent's construction, the ELR does not swallow up any statutory cause of action which creates a duty independent of contractual obligations. See Stallings v. Kennedy Electric, Inc., 710 So.2d 195, No. 97-1412 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998)(independent Section 553.84 cause of action not barred by ELR; there was no contract between the homebuyer and the subcontractor related to any Section 553.84 duty)....

...The statute continues to provide a remedy in noncontractual settings for those injured as a result of building code violations. See supra note 2; Stallings v. Kennedy Electric, Inc., No. 97-1412, 710 So.2d 195 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998). While most cases in Florida citing to Section 553.84 either ignore or dismiss the statutory cause of action, those that do acknowledge a cause of action under the statute consistently involve actions independent of a contract between the litigants. See Stallings v. Kennedy Electric, Inc., No. 97-1412, 710 So.2d 195 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998)(independent Section 553.84 cause of action not barred by ELR; there was no contract between the homebuyer and the subcontractor related to any Section 553.84 duty); Edward J....

...5th DCA), rev. denied, 402 So.2d 614 (Fla.1981) (owner has no common-law duty to supervise independent contractor's work). Liability, under the code, and in accordance with common-law principles, is imposed on "the person or party who committed the violation." § 553.84, Fla....

...The alleged damages were "lost use and enjoyment of their home", "additional rental expense", and "to completely rewire the home." We affirm the dismissal with prejudice of the negligence and negligence per se counts but reverse as to the statutory claim under section 553.84, Florida Statutes (1995). Section 553.84 provides a cause of action where a defendant has injured a plaintiff by violating the building code or doing construction without the required permit and states as follows: Notwithstanding any other civil remedies available, any person...

...arty who committed the violation. *196 (emphasis added). The trial court reasoned that the statute has its basis in a negligent act which would therefore subject the claim to the economic loss rule. However, barring appellants' statutory claim under section 553.84 based on the economic loss rule would essentially abolish the statutory cause of action....

...A few months after Delgado, the Third District decided Comptech Int'l, Inc. v. Milam Commerce Park, Ltd., 22 Fla. L. Weekly D2192 (Fla. 3d DCA Sept.17, 1997). One of the issues in Comptech was the effect of the economic loss rule upon claims brought under section 553.84....

...t under the South Florida Building Code where the claims are clearly contractual in nature and the cause of action is inseparably connected to the breaching party's performance under the agreement. Id. at D2192. The court reasoned that a claim under section 553.84 is subsumed by the economic loss rule because the economic losses are no different than those that could have been asserted in a breach of contract action....

...proof as a breach of contract, the statute is very clear. It begins "notwithstanding any other remedies available, any ... party ... damaged as a result of a violation ... has a cause of action ... against the ... party who committed the violation." § 553.84 Fla. Stat. (1996). The legislature has clearly set forth that a party can sue under section 553.84 in addition to any other remedy....

...The economic loss rule does not apply to statutory causes of action and should not be used as a sword to defeat them. This is particularly the case where the statute declares that a cause of action exists "notwithstanding any other remedies available" like section 553.84. The trial court's dismissal with prejudice of the statutory claim under section 553.84 is therefore reversed....

...Weekly D2192 (Fla. 3d DCA Sept.17, 1997). AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part, REMANDED. HARRIS and ANTOON, JJ., concur. NOTES [1] Appellants/homeowners did not allege privity with the appellee/subcontractor. [2] It should be noted that the constitutionality of section 553.84 is not an issue on this appeal.

...553.70, et sequitur, Fla. Stat. and the resultant harm suffered by persons who purchased and/or live in PULTE'S houses, including physical illness, personal injuries, loss of value, costs of repair and related damages. This suit is authorized under § 553.84, Fla....

...e alleged building code violations. The Buyers sued Westfield, alleging that the building code violations caused a diminution of their homes' value. In their class action [1] complaint, the Buyers seek damages for breach of contract and relief under section 553.84, Florida Statutes (2000)....

...ield in violation of applicable building code requirements regarding stucco application and thickness and/or in violation of applicable building code requirements that weep screeds or other effective means of drainage behind stucco be installed. [2] Section 553.84 provides: Notwithstanding any other remedies available, any person or party, in an individual capacity or on behalf of a class of persons or parties, damaged as a result of a violation of this part or the Florida Building Code, has a c...

...Therefore, these claims as well must be tried after remand. (b) We do agree, however, that there is no merit to the claims for breach of contractual indemnity against Morse/Diesel or for the direct, non-assigned claims against both appellees for negligence and under section 553.84, Florida Statutes (1986)....

...This action arises out of the design and construction of a condominium building. After discovering certain building code violations, appellant, Stone's Throw Condominium Association (STCA), filed suit against numerous parties who had been involved. The key claims, however, for purposes of this appeal, are: (1) a section 553.84, Florida Statutes (1995), claim that the architectural firm, appellees Mouriz Salazar & Associates, Inc., and George Mouriz, individually (referred to collectively as "Mouriz"), had violated the state minimum building codes; and (2) a...

...laim against Mouriz, alleging that they had negligently misrepresented that the state minimum building codes had been met when they had not. On the motion of Mouriz, the trial court dismissed the negligent misrepresentation claim with prejudice. The section 553.84 claim, made in the initial complaint, was dismissed without prejudice, but was never repled. We reverse the dismissal of the negligent misrepresentation claim, and affirm the dismissal of the section 553.84 claim because it was not properly preserved for review....

...tes. A procedural history of the litigation in the trial court as it pertained to Mouriz is important to our decision. STCA filed a complaint against the defendants as follows: Count I—breach of implied warranty against Deeb; Count II—violation of section 553.84, Florida Statutes (1995) (violation of minimum building codes) against all defendants; and Count III—negligence against Mouriz....

...STCA filed an amended complaint as follows: Count I—breach of implied warranty against Sand Cove; Count II— breach of implied warranty against Deeb as developer; Count III—breach of implied warranty against Deeb as contractor; Count IV—violation of section 553.84, Florida Statutes (1995), only against Deeb and Sand Cove; Count V—negligent misrepresentation against Mouriz for negligently representing that building codes had been met when they had not....

...STCA then filed a second amended complaint as follows: Count I—breach of implied warranty against Sand Cove; Count II—breach of implied warranty against Deeb as developer; Count III—breach of implied warranty against Deeb as contractor; *522 Count IV—violation of section 553.84, Florida Statutes (1995), against only Deeb and Sand Cove; Count V—negligent misrepresentation against Mouriz; Count VI—negligent misrepresentation against Cabrera; Count VII—breach of written express warranty against International...

...With leave of court, STCA filed a substitute second amended complaint that alleged as follows: Count I—breach of implied warranty against Sand Cove; Count II—breach of implied warranty against Deeb as developer; Count III—breach of implied warranty against Deeb as contractor; Count IV—violation of section 553.84, Florida Statutes (1995), against only Deeb and Sand Cove; Count V—negligent misrepresentation against Mouriz; Count VI—negligent misrepresentation against Cabrera; Count VII—breach of written express warranty against International...

...ddressed by the trial court. On remand, amendment to the pleadings should be liberally allowed, if necessary, and the trial judge should address that issue if successfully framed by the pleadings. We turn next to the validity of the dismissal of the section 553.84 claim without prejudice as to Mouriz....

...The above procedural history reveals that that claim was only repled as to Deeb and Sand Cove; it was never repled as to Mouriz. Accordingly, Mouriz argues that STCA has waived its right to have this court review that dismissal. STCA argues, however, that its original attempt to plead a section 553.84 cause of action against Mouriz survives under section 59.06, Florida Statutes (1995), which specifically allows appellate courts to review dismissals where the pleadings are amended....

...to reassert or mention the respondeat superior negligence claim against the Board. That claim, therefore, has been abandoned by appellant and cannot be resurrected in this appeal. 588 So.2d at 237. We, therefore, hold that STCA's attempt to plead a section 553.84 statutory cause of action against Mouriz has not been preserved for our review....

...On May 13, 1988, Seawatch at Marathon Condominium Association commenced this action on behalf of the unit owners. An amended complaint asserted claims for negligence, strict liability, breach of common-law and statutory warranties, and violation of the Florida Building Code, section 553.84, Florida Statutes (1991)....

...Pulte Home Corporation (Pulte) seeks review of the circuit court’s order denying its renewed motion to compel arbitration of an action brought by Bay at Cypress Creek Homeowners’ Association, Inc. (the HOA), for alleged building code violations under section 553.84, Florida Statutes (2011)....

...the computers located in the warehouse. In addition, the landlord failed to obtain the required building permits for the building addition. Comptech sued Mi-lam for: (1) negligent selection of contractor; (2) negligent construction; (3) violation of section 553.84; and (4) return of illegally collected rent. The Third District held the negligence claims were barred by the economic loss rule, despite the statutory duty created by section 553.84....

...ated in the warehouse. In addition, the landlord failed to obtain the required building permits for the building addition. Comptech sued Milam for: (1) negligent selection of contractor; (2) negligent construction; (3) violation of section 553.84; and (4) return of illegally collected rent. The Third District held the negligence claims were barred by the economic loss rule, despite the statutory duty created by section 553.84....

...Beazer then sued Delacruz in Florida state court for its part in the construction. ( See Doc. 61-1). Beazer's claims include breach of contract, contractual indemnity, negligence, common law indemnity, and violating the Florida Building Code under Florida Statute § 553.84....

...ses for the rulings. Section 489.128, Florida Statutes (1993), provides that contracts entered into on or after October 1, 1990 and performed by a contractor who has failed to maintain his license are unenforceable in law or in equity. Additionally, section 553.84, Florida Statutes (1992), provides the owner with a statutory cause of action as a person or party damaged as a result of a violation of the State Minimum Building Codes....

...In November 2004, Plaintiff brought suit against Defendant. On September 27, 2005, the instant action was removed to this Court. Doc. 1. Plaintiffs complaint consists of four counts: (1) breach of express warranty, (2) breach of implied warranty, (3) violation of Florida Statute § 553.84, and (4) violation of Florida's unfair & deceptive trade practices laws (§ 501.201 et....

...[3] In any event, failure to cooperate is a factual defense left to the jury to decide. C. Building Code Claim Plaintiff contends Defendant violated the Florida Building Code (FBC) by using Textured Cementitious Finish (TCF) on the exterior of her home instead of stucco. Florida Statute § 553.84 provides homeowners a private cause of action against homebuilders in the event that the homeowner is damaged by a FBC violation....

...ere is no personal injury or damage to property other than the property that is the subject of the permits, plans, and inspections, this section does not apply unless the person or party knew or should have known that the violation existed. FL Stat. 553.84....

...prior settlements. This appeal involves only the judgment exonerating Jordan Marsh. The first and main contention in this appeal is that Sierra was entitled to a directed verdict against Jordan Marsh on a theory of strict liability. Sierra relies on section 553.84, Florida Statutes (1987), which provides: Statutory civil action....

...5th DCA), rev. denied, 402 So.2d 614 (Fla. 1981) (owner has no common-law duty to supervise independent contractor's work). Liability, under the code, and in accordance with common-law principles, is imposed on "the person or party who committed the violation." § 553.84, Fla....

...have consistently subjected statutory causes of action to the workers’ compensation exclusivity provision. For example, in Pacheco v. Florida Power & Light Co., 784 So.2d 1159 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001), the Third District considered an argument that section 553.84, Florida Statutes, expressly allowed anyone to sue for injuries resulting from a building code violation, in addition to other remedies available under Florida law....

...It provided that “Notwithstanding any other remedies available” a person injured as a result of a building code violation “has a cause of action in any court of competent jurisdiction against the person or party who committed the violation.” § 553.84, Fla. Stat. (2001). Like the WQAA, the building code then provided a defense to liability, and nowhere acknowledged workers’ compensation immunity as a defense. In rejecting the argument that section 553.84 created a cause of action that was not subject to the workers’ compensation immunity provision, the Third District observed that the Workers’ Compensation Act provides “broad employer immunity from liability actions” and that d...

...Count I will therefore be dismissed with prejudice. B, Count II—Violations of Florida Building Code While Florida law does not recognize a common law duty to follow the Code, the Florida Legislature has provided a statutory cause of action against buildei-s who fail to do so. Florida Statute § 553.84 provides homeowners a private cause of action against a homebuilder if they have been damaged as a result of a Code violation. In Count II, the Plaintiffs allege that Pulte “installed stucco siding which violated the Code, causing the stucco siding to fail, thus Pulte violated Section 553.84.” As was the case in regard to Count I, the Plaintiffs’ allegations are entirely con-clusory, mimicking the language of the applicable cause of action but offering no explanation as to how the stucco siding violated the Code or how it failed....

of negligence and for remedies pursuant to section 553.84, Florida Statutes (1999). *373Section 489.128

...section 558.004, Florida Statutes (2020), the Osbornes sent Drees a notice of claim regarding faulty stucco. After rejecting Drees’s repair terms, the Osbornes filed suit. The operative complaint1 alleged four counts: (1) a statutory action under section 553.84, Florida Statutes, for violating the Florida Building Code due to improperly installed stucco; (2) negligence relating to stucco; (3) negligence relating to paint; and (4) negligence relating to window installation. Drees filed a...

...lony was the result of defective construction by Ard and SRBD. The third party complaints alleged counts for breach of contract (as to SRBD), breach of implied warranty of fitness and merchantability, negligence, building code violations pursuant to section 553.84, Florida Statutes, and breach of warranty (as to Ard)....

...o install cast-auger pilings below the footings in an attempt to address adverse soil conditions, but that they failed to obtain the necessary permits. She alleged in Counts I and II a statutory cause of action and negligence per se for violation of section 553.84, Florida Statutes, [1] which provides: *1252 Statutory civil action.—Notwithstanding any other remedies available, any person or party, in an individual capacity or on behalf of a class of persons or parties, damaged as a result of a...

...ilings, as required by the building code. The lower court granted the motion and entered final judgment for Foundation Services. Our standard of review is de novo. See Volusia County v. Aberdeen at Ormond Beach, L.P., 760 So.2d 126 (Fla.2000). Under section 553.84, Foundation Services was required to establish three facts in order to show it was not liable for violating a building-construction standard or code: (1) the necessary building permits had been obtained, and the Alachua County agency w...

...4th DCA 1966) ("The unsworn allegations of the amended complaint constituted legal conclusions and were not evidence of any fact."). AFFIRMED. ERVIN, BARFIELD, and POLSTON, JJ., concur. NOTES [1] The parties do not specify a year for this statute, but it is clear they both relied on section 553.84, as amended in 2000, which took effect on March 1, 2002....

violation of the Florida Building Code under section 553.84, Florida Statutes (2009); (2) breach of contract;

...nt on its complaint against appellees Coastal Windows and Doors, Inc., and Stone Image, Inc., for indemnity and contribution to its liability for construction defects. We agree with appellant that there remained issues of material fact as to whether section 553.84, Florida Statutes (2005), precluded appellant from seeking indemnification. The exception to liability in section 553.84 requires a showing as to various facts, many of which were not addressed in the record. Further, as appellant sought indemnity for violations of both statutory and non-statutory building standards, it was error to grant summary ju...

...Griffin called *717 Ellis to have them repair loose pickets on the opposite railing, but did not complain about a loose handrail attachment on the other side. In July 2005, Griffin brought the current suit against Ellis. The case proceeded to trial on two counts: negligence and negligence per se pursuant to Florida Statute section 553.84....

...he ten months between installation of the railing and Griffin's fall. We find the comment, if error, harmless. The Appellant next argues on appeal that the trial court erred in granting a directed verdict against him on his claim that Ellis violated section 553.84, Florida Statutes (2007), and by refusing Griffin's requested jury instruction. We do not find error and affirm. Section 553.84 provides that "any person or party ......

...As to the remaining appellees, however, we conclude that summary judgment was properly entered because of the immunity conferred by section 440.11(1), Florida Statutes (1997) of the Worker’s Compensation Law. 7 A. In doing so, we first reject the plaintiffs claim that section 553.84, Florida Statutes (1997), which creates a cause of action for violations of the State Minimum Building Codes, 8 such as were claimed in this case, overcomes or “trumps” the effect of section 440.11....

...directed verdict finding CDC violated a provision of the Florida Building Code involving the building’s post-tensioning system because both Eloquence and CDC’s experts testified that there was a violation. However, the trial court reviewed the language of section 553.84, Florida Statutes, and found the jury should still be permitted to make liability findings as to whether CDC knew or should have known that a material violation existed, and whether there was any personal injury or damage to propert...

...Gersten of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani LLP, Miami; and Lawrence J. Dougherty, C. David Harper, and Adam R. Alaee of Foley & Lardner LLP, Tampa, for Appellee. BLACK, Judge.  Shane and Laura Hayslip appeal a nonfinal order granting U.S. Home Corporation's motion to stay the Hayslips' claim for relief under section 553.84, Florida Statutes (2016), of the Florida Building Codes Act and to compel arbitration pursuant to the original special warranty deed....

...eservations and limitations, if any." In January 2017, the Hayslips filed a lawsuit against U.S. Home, alleging that U.S. Home inadequately and improperly installed the stucco system on the home in violation of the Florida Building Codes Act. See § 553.84....

...of construction, or construction, repair, alteration, or remodeling of real property resulting from . . . [a] violation of the applicable codes in effect at the time of construction or remodeling which gives rise to a cause of action pursuant to s. 553.84.").2 The Hayslips rely on Caulk in reaching the contrary conclusion; Caulk, however, is distinguishable....

...at 112. In 2010, the original purchasers sold the Home to the Hayslips. The Hayslips’ 2010 deed provides that it is “[s]ubject to easements, restrictions, reservations and limitations, if any.” Id. In 2017, the Hayslips filed a lawsuit against U.S. Home pursuant to section 553.84, Florida Statutes (2016), alleging that U.S....

...atutes (2018)), demanding compliance. When Bandklayder failed to repair the requested items, the Sabgas sued. In their three-count complaint, the Sabgas alleged claims for (1) breach of contract, (2) violation of the Florida Building Code, section 553.84, Florida Statutes, and (3) breach of implied warranty of fitness. Bandklayder answered the complaint and asserted several affirmative defenses....

...The court awarded the Association over one million dollars, plus prejudgment interest, jointly and severally against CFS, SCE, and Scherer. Scherer appeals the judgment against him; the corporate entities have not appealed. The Association's single count against Scherer was based on section 553.84, Florida Statutes (2002), which creates a civil action for building code violations. Section 553.84 states in pertinent part: [A]ny person or party, in an individual capacity or on behalf of a class of persons or parties, damaged as a result of a violation of this part or the Florida Building Code, has a cause of action in any court...

...The owners counterclaimed against the corporation and filed a third-party complaint against Sinha individually. They alleged in part that, as the corporation's qualifying agent, Sinha was personally liable for violation of Florida's minimum building codes pursuant to section 553.84. Id. at 985 n. 3. Other than citing this statute in a footnote explaining the owners' claim, the supreme court did not examine the civil cause of action created by section 553.84....

...In short, he was in the same position as Clark Scherer was in this case. Thus, today we make explicit what is perhaps implicitly stated in Murthy: a qualifying agent's breach of the duties imposed by chapter 489 does not give rise to a claim against the qualifying agent under section 553.84 for a building code violation....

...NOTES [1] The building permits were issued in 2002. We note this fact to explain our later citation to the 2002 version of the Florida Statutes, but there are no significant differences pertinent to this case in the versions immediately before or after 2002. [2] Prior versions of section 553.84 referred to the State Minimum Building Codes. See, e.g., § 553.84, Fla....

...Porto included a list of claimed defects, including issues with the roof, building exterior, floor tiles, mold, seawall, and the electrical, mechanical, and plumbing systems. Count II piggy-backed off of Count I, claiming that the cited defects violated the building code and gave Porto a cause of action under Florida Statute § 553.84....

...o disclose them to the buyer.”). . Porto did not ask the Court to reconsider its grant of summary judgment to WB on the Florida Building Code claim or the negligence claim. See [DE 501 at 3 n. 1 ("Porto Venezia also brought claims for violation of Section 553.84 and negligence, which are not pertinent to the instant Motion for Reconsideration.”) ]....

Appellee as a result of building code violations. Section 553.84, Florida Statutes (2013), provides: Notwithstanding

Appellee as a result of building code violations. Section 553.84, Florida Statutes (2013), provides: Notwithstanding

Appellee as a result of building code violations. Section 553.84, Florida Statutes (2013), provides: Notwithstanding

HARRIS, J. The Iovinos sued ITT for the faulty construction of a home in Palm Coast. They alleged counts in breach of express warranty, breach of implied warranty, violation of section 553.84, Florida Statutes, fraud in the inducement, and deceptive and unfair trade practices....