CopyCited 18 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 13 Fla. L. Weekly 539, 1988 Fla. LEXIS 960, 1988 WL 93747
...and necessary party since she had purchased a condominium unit on November 8, 1985, from Bonefish Yacht Club. That motion was granted on June 30, 1986, which was within the limitation period of one year from the recording of the first claim of lien. § 713.22(1), Fla....
CopyCited 13 times | Published | District Court, S.D. Florida | 1974 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7707
...renders the claim of lien voidable to the extent that such failure or delay is shown to have been prejudicial to any person entitled to rely on it. F.S. §
713.08(4) (c), F.S.A. [9] F.S. §
713.21(3), F.S.A. [10] F.S. §
713.21(4), F.S.A. [11] F.S. §
713.22, F.S.A....
...[24] Plaintiffs point out that under the statute in question, the Clerk of the Court files the claim of lien; no bond is required of the lienor; and the creditor is not required to immediately institute suit. The latter distinction is not well made. See F.S. §§
713.21(3) and
713.22, F.S.A.
CopyCited 8 times | Published | Florida 4th District Court of Appeal
...Surely if the parties may abate the action without prejudice they may stipulate to extend it within reason, as was done here. The orderly administration of justice is advanced, not burdened, by settlement negotiations. Finally, the owner of a property interest subjected to a lien has recourse to Section 713.22(2), Florida Statutes (1979) to reduce the time within which action must be commenced to enforce that lien to sixty days....
CopyCited 8 times | Published | Florida 4th District Court of Appeal
...ontractor for the amount of its claim. The determinative issue is whether the amended cross-claim, under Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.190 [1] , relates back to the filing of the earlier cross-claim so as to satisfy the time requirement of Sections
713.21(3) [2] ,
713.22(1) [3] ,
713.24(4) [4] , Florida Statutes (1975)....
...The Mechanics' Lien statute created for subcontractors a new right of action that did not exist in the common law, and expressly provided that no mechanics' lien shall continue for a longer period than one year after the claim of lien has been recorded unless within that time an action to enforce the lien is commenced. Section 713.22(1)....
...[2] Section
713.21, Florida Statutes (1975), provides: A lien properly perfected under this chapter may be discharged by any of the following methods: (3) By failure to begin an action to enforce the lien within the time prescribed in this part I. [3] Section
713.22(1), Florida Statutes (1975), provides: No lien provided by part I of this chapter shall continue for a longer period than 1 year after the claim of lien has been recorded unless within that time an action to enforce the lien is commenced in a court of competent jurisdiction. [4] Section
713.24(4), Florida Statutes (1975), provides: If no proceeding to enforce a transferred lien shall be commenced within the time specified in s.
713.22 or if it appears that the transferred lien has been satisfied of record, the clerk shall return said security upon request of the person depositing or filing the same, or the insurer.
CopyCited 8 times | Published | Florida 5th District Court of Appeal | 14 Fla. L. Weekly 1553, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 3641, 1989 WL 69814
...Southern Bell Telephone and Telegraph Co.,
515 So.2d 180 (Fla. 1987); Lewis v. Guthartz,
428 So.2d 222 (Fla. 1982); John Brown Automation, Inc. v. Nobles,
537 So.2d 614 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988). AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part; and REMANDED. ORFINGER and COBB, JJ., concur. NOTES [1] See §
713.22, Fla....
CopyCited 8 times | Published | Florida 3rd District Court of Appeal | 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 10825, 2003 WL 21658275
...2d DCA 1999). [2] This general rule is especially apropos here because the one year statutory period for filing a foreclosure action on Allied's lien had run and dismissal would effectively be with prejudice, forever barring a lien foreclosure action. See § 713.22(1), Fla....
CopyCited 6 times | Published | Florida 2nd District Court of Appeal
...in and the surety USF & G. The appellees' answer and affirmative defenses included an allegation that the second amended complaint was filed more than one year after the recording of appellant's claim of lien, and therefore, the action was barred by section 713.22(1), Florida Statutes (1981)....
CopyCited 6 times | Published | Florida 3rd District Court of Appeal | 1993 WL 63493
...ed. See Krasne-Gold Coast Joint Venture v. Allied Drywall, Inc.,
573 So.2d 194 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991); Goldberger v. United Plumbing and Heating, Inc.,
358 So.2d 860 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978); Wesley Constr. Co. v. Yarnell,
268 So.2d 454 (Fla. 4th DCA 1972). Section
713.22(1) provides that a lien is not enforceable after one year from the recording of the claim of lien "unless within that time an action to enforce the lien is commenced in a court of competent jurisdiction." Effective October 1, 1990, the...
CopyCited 6 times | Published | Florida 3rd District Court of Appeal | 1997 WL 422769
...il 10, 1996 to increase the claim of lien to $3,342,388. The gravamen of the complaint was that the claim of lien had expired due to Morse Diesel's failure to commence an action to foreclose upon the same within the one (1) year period prescribed by section 713.22(1), Florida Statutes (1995) and/or Williams Island's satisfaction of the subcontractor's liens....
...95-08298 CA 11. Reversed. NOTES [1] See Morse Diesel International, Inc. v. 2000 Island Boulevard, Inc., Case No. 95-08298 CA 11. [2] That section provides that: If no proceeding to enforce a transferred lien shall be commenced within the time specified in s. 713.22 or if it appears that the transferred lien has been satisfied of record, the clerk shall return said security upon request of the person depositing or filing the same, or the insurer....
CopyCited 6 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 1976 Fla. App. LEXIS 14246
...Liles, of Smith, Hulsey, Schwalbe & Nichols, and Charles Cook Howell, III, Jacksonville, for appellees. BOYER, Chief Judge. Appellant, plaintiff below, appeals from the trial court's order dismissing its second amended complaint. The question to be resolved is whether the one year statute of limitations imposed by F.S. § 713.22(1) is applicable....
...efendant. This last complaint, which alleged that Multicon Properties was the owner of the subject property, was filed eighteen months after appellant recorded its claim of lien and six months after the one year period of limitations imposed by F.S. § 713.22(1) had lapsed....
...d who voluntarily drops that party as a defendant may then re-add that party defendant after the statute of limitations has run. For reasons expressed below, we hold that he cannot. A fundamental purpose of the limitation periods established by F.S. §
713.22(1) and §
713.24(4) is the speedy determination of mechanic's lien claims....
CopyCited 5 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal
...Civ.P. 1.050; not, as Corry urges, when a subcontractor files a notice of intent to claim a lien with the owner. Since more than one year has elapsed since Corry filed its claim of lien, Corry cannot now begin an action against the limited partnership. Section 713.22(1) requires that actions to enforce a claim of lien commence within one year after the claim of lien is recorded....
CopyCited 5 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 1979 Fla. LEXIS 4873
...It argued that the trial court erred in holding a valid lien had been perfected, since the claimant failed to serve a legally sufficient notice to the owner. Secondly, the petitioner argued that it should not be held liable on its bond because its joinder as defendant was not timely under section 713.22(1), Florida Statutes (1973)....
...division improvements under section
713.04, is not required to serve a notice on the owner. On the timeliness issue the court held that since the suit to enforce the lien was filed within one year of the recording of the claim of lien as required by section
713.22, the surety could not defend on the ground that it was not joined as a defendant until two and one-half years after the recording of the claim of lien and more than two years after the transfer of the lien to bond....
...itches and other area drainage facilities, and the laying of pipes and conduits for water, gas, electric, sewage and drainage purposes, and construction of canals and shall also include the altering, repairing and redoing of all said things... . [2] 713.22 Duration of lien....
CopyCited 5 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida
...Due to the certification, we have certiorari jurisdiction of the case. [1] The question certified by the District Court is as follows: "Does the filing of an amended claim of lien [mechanics' lien] toll the running of the sixty days provided for in Fla. Stat. § 713.22(2)?" The facts of the case are fully delineated in the opinion of the District Court and need not be restated here....
...of contest filed, that the claim shall proceed to conclusion. To toll the time for filing suit or, as here, to allow its voluntary dismissal and refiling with simply an amendment to it adds to the time; this was not contemplated by the lien statute, § 713.22....
...ed suit to enforce the amount of the lien actually claimed. To be efficacious F.S., Section
713.08(4) (b), F.S.A., authorizes an amended claim of lien to operate forward unaffected by the shortening effects of a priorly filed notice of contest. F.S. Section
713.22(2), F.S.A., specifically requires that a copy of a notice of contest shall be mailed by the clerk to the "lien claimant at the address shown in the claim of lien or most recent amendment thereto ..." indicating that if an amended claim of lien is filed the notice of contest shall be in response to the amended lien and not merely to the original claim of lien. (Emphasis supplied.) F.S. Section
713.22(2), F.S.A., should be read in connection with F.S. Section
713.08(4) (b), F.S.A., so as to give each provision an area of operation. As the majority has it, Section
713.22(2) supervenes Section
713.08(4)(b) and it will avail a lienor nothing if he needs to file an amended claim of lien after the running of the owner's sixty-day notice of contest....
CopyCited 5 times | Published | Florida 2nd District Court of Appeal | 1976 Fla. App. LEXIS 13935
...ch of contract arising out of the same transaction upon which the lien was predicated. Appellants filed a motion to dismiss and to strike the mechanic's lien count on the grounds that the cause was barred by the one year limitation period prescribed § 713.22(1), F.S....
CopyCited 5 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 12 Fla. L. Weekly 1759
...Thus, the issue presented is whether a suit filed prematurely because not filed at least five days after the serving of the contractor's affidavit under section
713.06(3)(d)1, can nevertheless be considered a timely filing in order to meet the 60-day requirement of section
713.22(2)....
...affidavit was served prior to the time for filing the lawsuit had expired, even though the one-year period for filing the lawsuit had been drastically reduced to sixty days when Coquina filed a notice of contest of lien pursuant to the provisions of section 713.22(2), Florida Statutes (1985)....
...il five days after serving the affidavit, but only suspends the right of action on a lien for that period. The five-day provision, although enacted at the same time as the 1963 amendment (Ch. 63-135, Laws of Florida (1963)) adding the provision (now section 713.22(2)) allowing formal contest of the claim by the owner and shortening the period for suit to sixty days, is not shown by appellants to serve any valid legislative purpose with respect to the operation of the provision for notice of contest....
CopyCited 5 times | Published | Florida 5th District Court of Appeal
...ated in Orange County, Florida. The lis pendens was filed pursuant to section
48.23(1), Florida Statutes (1981), [1] in connection with petitioner's efforts to foreclose a mechanic's lien based on a recorded claim of lien on the property pursuant to section
713.22, Florida Statutes (1981)....
CopyCited 5 times | Published | Florida 4th District Court of Appeal
...and 2 1/6 years after the transfer of the lien to bond. This argument is not without merit by reason of Chapter
713.24(4) Fla. Stat. (1975), which reads: "If no proceeding to enforce a transferred lien shall be commenced within the time specified in §
713.22 or if it appears that the transferred lien has been satisfied *227 of record, the clerk shall return said security upon request of the person depositing or filing the same, or the insurer." We are content, however, that this section clearly intends that any future proceedings be commenced within the year set forth in §
713.22 and does not seek to address itself to the situation where the suit has already been filed prior to the transfer, which was the case here....
...selves with questions of fact from which we perceive no reversible error. AFFIRMED. ANSTEAD, J., and TIMOTHY P. POULTON, Associate Judge, concur. NOTES [1] We are assuming that the period refers to one year from the filing of the claim of lien as in § 713.22....
CopyCited 4 times | Published | Florida 5th District Court of Appeal | 11 Fla. L. Weekly 295
...However, the trial court held that the Corbin lien foreclosure judgment, upon which its title claim is based, is void. We affirm. On December 18, 1975, Corbin filed a suit to foreclose its lien in the County Court of Citrus County. It was the last day allowed to file the lien foreclosure, pursuant to section 713.22(1), Florida Statutes (1975)....
...[4] The filing of the suit in the county court rather than the circuit court was a nullity because it lacked subject matter jurisdiction. When the Corbin lien foreclosure was thereafter transferred to the circuit court, the one year mandated by the mechanic lien statute had run. This was a fatal defect in this case since section 713.22(1) is not an ordinary statute of limitations....
...o as to have saved additional filing fees, had the transfer preceded the running of the one year lien period. However, the mechanic lien statute provides that this time period can only be halted by filing suit in a "court of competent jurisdiction," section 713.22(1), which the county court clearly was not....
CopyCited 4 times | Published | Florida 2nd District Court of Appeal | 1977 Fla. App. LEXIS 15063
...The court below, having found that the appellant had failed to name the true fee simple owner of certain real property as a proper party defendant by its correct corporate name, dismissed the action for failure to file suit within one year as required by Section 713.22(1), Florida Statutes....
...doing business as Sunshine Associates, Inc., had entered into the contract with Mark Fame, Inc. [1] After granting appellee's motion to dismiss, the court below denied appellant's petition to reconsider the dismissal. At issue is the application of Section 713.22(1), Florida Statutes....
...e name within one year of the filing of the claim of lien. This court finds no fault with appellee's authority concerning the application of statutory limitation periods. [2] Nevertheless, we feel that to literally enforce the one year limitation of Section 713.22(1) would in light of the circumstances in this case be both manifestly unjust and inconsistent with the decisions bearing on the question....
CopyCited 3 times | Published | United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida | 1985 Bankr. LEXIS 5244
...ile claim of lien and, of course, also to file a secured claim in this case. At the same time, Hallmark sought the injunction, Hallmark also served Artistic with a paper purporting to be a Notice of Contest of Lien, filed pursuant to Florida Statute 713.22....
CopyCited 2 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal
...f
contest of lien and served the notice upon Pipeline by certified
mail on November 2, 2016. The notice of contest shortened the
time limit for Pipeline to file an action to enforce its lien to 60
days, in this case expiring on January 2, 2017. See § 713.22(2),
Fla....
...dice and is thus
reviewable on appeal. Martinez v. Collier Cnty. Pub. Sch.,
804
So. 2d 559, 560 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002). A new action by Pipeline to
enforce its lien would have to be time-barred as of January 2,
2017, by the 60-day limitation set out in section
713.22(2),
Florida Statutes.
3
dismissal is therefore reversed and remanded for further
proceedings
In Emerald Coast Utilities Authority v....
CopyCited 2 times | Published | Florida 3rd District Court of Appeal
...orded prior to the recordation of the plaintiff's mortgage and hence was superior thereto. The court further found that the appellee had properly commenced an action for the enforcement of same, in accordance with the requirements of §§
713.21 and
713.22, Florida Statutes (1971), by the institution of its complaint to foreclose lien against the lessee's interest [recorded fee simple owner, Diversified Mortgage Investors, was not named as a party-defendant] and that, therefore, appellee had properly perfected its lien. The trial court found that the appellee's lien was superior to the appellant's lien and that the appellant's lien was superior to all other liens. We disagree. Sections
713.21 and
713.22 (1971), Florida Statutes, provide that a mechanic's lien must be enforced within the period of one year from filing....
...The exact language of the statute speaks in terms of "discharge" of the lien. Section
713.21, Florida Statutes (1971) provides that a lien properly perfected under Chapter 713 "may be discharged * * * by failure to begin an action to enforce the lien within the time prescribed in Part I of this Chapter". Section
713.22(1), Florida Statutes (1971) provides that "no lien provided by Part I of this Chapter shall continue for a longer period than one year after the claim of lien has been recorded, unless within that time an action to enforce the lien is...
...eriod. See: General Guaranty Insurance Company v. Sunrise Nursing Homes, Inc.,
326 So.2d 446 (Fla. 2nd D.C.A. 1976). No action having been taken within one year of recording a lien to perfect it against record fee holder, the lien was discharged per Section
713.22(1), Florida Statutes (1971)....
...Benjamin d/b/a Sage Corporation and Sage Corporation to have held a valid lien is reversed. Bowery v. Babbit,
99 Fla. 1151,
128 So. 801; Hughey v. Stevmier,
190 So.2d 410 (Fla. 2nd D.C.A. 1966); General Guaranty Insurance Company v. Sunrise Nursing Homes, Inc., supra; Section
713.22(1), Florida Statutes (1971)....
CopyCited 2 times | Published | Florida 4th District Court of Appeal | 2002 WL 1059536
...The homeowners filed an answer and affirmative defenses, once again raising the lack of a contractor's affidavit having been timely delivered prior to the filing of the action. The trial court heard the matter and entered a final judgment in favor of the contractor on July 19, 2000. Sections
713.06(3)(d) and
713.22 of the Florida Statutes govern the outcome of this case. Section
713.22, Florida Statutes (2001), provides: (1) No lien provided by this part shall continue for a longer period than 1 year after the claim of lien has been recorded, unless within that time an action to enforce the lien is commenced in a court of competent jurisdiction. Thus, a lawsuit to foreclose on a construction lien must be commenced within one year after the original claim of lien is filed. §
713.22, Fla....
CopyCited 2 times | Published | Florida 5th District Court of Appeal | 1988 WL 79838
...mechanic's lien against their new residence. After a non-jury trial, the court originally ruled in favor of Foy and established his right to foreclose a lien for $10,778.98. On motion for rehearing, the court ruled for the Mangums on the ground that section
713.22(1), [1] Florida Statutes (1983), bars Foy's claim under the mechanic's lien statute because he filed his foreclosure suit more than one year after filing his original claim of lien, although his suit was filed within one year after filing an amended claim, pursuant to section
713.07(4)....
...The issue in this case, (which has apparently not been addressed by any reported court opinion that we can find) is whether section
713.07(4) has the effect of extending the one year time limit in which to file suit to foreclose a mechanic's lien in section
713.22(1)....
...Caloosa Bayview Corp.,
265 So.2d 85 (Fla. 2d DCA 1972), approved,
278 So.2d 282 (Fla. 1973), the issue was whether the filing of an amended claim of lien tolls the running of the sixty day abbreviated period in which to enforce a mechanic's lien provided for in section
713.22(2). [2] The Stilson court held that the re-filing had no such effect. Section
713.22(2) was intended to protect the owner....
...But the re-filing was not for new or different work done. Nor would his failure to re-file the claim have affected his right to foreclose the original claim, at least against the owner. Were the re-filing allowed to extend the one year time period of section 713.22(1), a property owner could be faced with as much as a two-year delay (rather than one) *1334 to await suits by mechanic's lien claimants....
...Further, if one time period is tolled as in this context, other filings and time periods under the mechanic's lien law may be similarly affected, leading to confusion in an area of the law which can least tolerate uncertainty. We hold that re-filing pursuant to section
713.07(4) does not extend the one year time limit of section
713.22(1) in which to sue to enforce a mechanic's lien claim. AFFIRMED. DAUKSCH and DANIEL, JJ., concur. NOTES [1] Section
713.22(1), Florida Statutes (1983) provides:
713.22 Duration of lien....
...etent jurisdiction. The continuation of the lien effected by the commencement of the action shall not be good against creditors or subsequent purchasers for a valuable consideration and without notice, unless a notice of lis pendens is recorded. [2] Section 713.22(2), Florida Statutes, provides: (2) An owner or his agent or attorney may elect to shorten the time prescribed in subsection (1) within which to commence an action to enforce any claim of lien or claim against a bond or other security under s....
CopyCited 2 times | Published | Florida 5th District Court of Appeal
...should have been commenced within one year from the date the lien was recorded. We agree and affirm. Section
713.24(4), Florida Statutes (1973) provides: If no proceeding to enforce a transferred lien shall be commenced within the time specified in §
713.22 or if it appears that the transferred lien has been satisfied of record, the clerk shall return said security upon request of the person depositing or filing the same, or the insurer. In turn, Section
713.22(1), Florida Statutes (1973) provides: Duration of lien....
CopyCited 2 times | Published | Florida 2nd District Court of Appeal | 2016 WL 1386642, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 5404
...also took
advantage of these special statutory lien rights by posting a transfer bond thereby
transferring the lien on the real property to a surety bond and removing the cloud on her
property's title. Hiller then filed a notice of contest under section 713.22(2), shortening
the time within which Phoenix could commence an action on the transfer bond to sixty
days from the date of service of the notice....
...4th DCA 2012), and
argued that regardless of the action Phoenix commenced against Hiller prior to transfer,
-2-
Phoenix had to commence an action against the surety or the transfer bond would
extinguish automatically by operation of section 713.22(2)....
...Importantly, section
713.24(4) provides for the scenario where, as in this case, a claim
was pending on the lien at the time it was transferred:
If a proceeding to enforce a lien is commenced in a court of
competent jurisdiction within the time specified in s.
713.22
and, during such proceeding, the lien is transferred pursuant
to this section or s....
...brought as of the date of filing the action to enforce the lien,
and the court shall have jurisdiction over the action.
Pursuant to the "unless otherwise shortened by operation of law"
language in section
713.24(4), section
713.22(2) allows the owner to shorten the time
period to commence an action on the security by filing a notice of contest, as Hiller did
here. See, e.g., W.W. Plastering, Inc. v. Chism Constr. Inc.,
867 So. 2d 600, 601 (Fla.
1st DCA 2004) ("[U]nless an owner elects to shorten the time for filing an action against
a bond by following the procedures set forth in section
713.22(2), Florida Statutes, an
action against a transferred lien must be filed—in the circuit court—within one year of
the date that the transferred lien is recorded or the security must be returned.")....
...After
service of the notice of contest "[t]he lien of any lienor upon whom such notice is served
and who fails to institute a suit to enforce his or her lien within 60 days after service of
-4-
such notice shall be extinguished automatically." § 713.22(2)....
...ors alike receive timely and certain
resolution of the Chapter 713 litigation. See, e.g., Harris Paint Co. v. Multicon
Properties, Inc.,
326 So. 2d 43, 44 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976) ("A fundamental purpose of the
limitation periods established by F.S. s
713.22(1) and s
713.24(4) is the speedy
determination of mechanic's lien claims.").
Reversed and remanded.
KELLY and KHOUZAM, JJ., Concur.
-7-
CopyCited 1 times | Published | Florida 2nd District Court of Appeal | 1974 Fla. App. LEXIS 8241
...The appellant was not paid in full and, on December 7, 1972, as provided by Section
713.03(3), Florida Statutes, filed his claim of lien against the real property for which he had drafted the drawings, plans and specifications. The appellee, as authorized by the provisions of Section
713.22(2), Florida Statutes, duly served upon the appellant notice of contest of lien which limited the time within which appellant had to file suit to enforce the lien to 60 days from the date of the service of *53 said notice. The original action was not filed within the prescribed period of time and the claim of lien was extinguished automatically by operation of law. Section
713.22(2), supra....
...On this appeal appellant urges that the trial court erred in striking the prayer for an equitable lien. We disagree. In the case sub judice, there was an adequate remedy available to appellant; however, it clearly appears that he did not pursue that remedy within the time prescribed in Section 713.22(2), supra....
CopyCited 1 times | Published | Florida 2nd District Court of Appeal | 2014 WL 2118044, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 7649
...The Snells filed a complaint in county court on March 30, 2011, contesting, in part, the validity of the lien, and in response thereto, Mott’s Contracting moved to dismiss or stay the action. The Snells then filed a notice of contest of hen pursuant to section 713.22(2), Florida Statutes (2010), reducing the prescribed time for Mott’s Contracting to file suit to enforce the lien from one year to sixty days....
...s Contracting and the amount credited to the Snells. However, the county court further found that Mott’s Contracting was not entitled to attorney’s fees under section
713.29 because it failed to take any action to enforce the claim of lien under section
713.22 within the sixty days after the lien was contested....
...under this part, the prevailing party is entitled to recover a reasonable fee for the services of her or his attorney.” (Emphasis added.) An action to enforce a construction lien must be brought “in a court of competent jurisdiction” within one year of recording the claim of lien or it automatically extinguishes. See § 713.22(1) (emphasis added)....
...7, 2013) (quoting Gomez v. Vill. of Pinecrest,
41 So.3d 180, 185 (Fla.2010)). The “legislative intent is determined first and foremost from the statute’s text.” Id. (citing Heart of Adoptions, Inc. v. J.A.,
963 So.2d 189, 198 (Fla.2007)). As indicated previously, section
713.22(1) requires that the action to enforce the lien be filed in a “court.” The definition section of the Construction Lien Law, section
713.01, does not define court. Importantly, however, section
713.29, which we must read in tandem with section
713.22, distinguishes arbitration and court....
...f the statute.’ ” Sch. Bd. of Palm Beach Cnty. v. Survivors Charter Sch., Inc.,
3 So.3d 1220, 1233 (Fla.2009) (quoting Gulfstream Park Racing Ass’n v. Tampa Bay Downs, Inc.,
948 So.2d 599, 606 (Fla.2006)). Thus, if the legislature had intended section
713.22(1) to include arbitration, it could have easily used the term “tribunal” instead of “court.” We finally turn to the Florida Arbitration Code, 7 as we must “ ‘give full effect to all statutory provisions and construe related...
...Gazebo Landscaping Design, Inc.,
660 So.2d 623, 625 (Fla.1995); accord Home Electric of Dade Cnty., Inc. v. Gonas,
547 So.2d 109, 110 (Fla.1989). It is undisputed that Mott’s Contracting failed to file an action to enforce the claim of lien in the court. As such, Mott’s Contracting failed to satisfy the requirements of section
713.22 and is therefore not entitled to attorney’s fees under section
713.29. Thus we agree with the county court’s finding that, despite the arbitrator’s determination, “Mott’s [Contracting] did not take any action to enforce *611 any claim of lien under F.S.
713.22(2) within the 60 days after the lien was contested.” As such, certiorari relief is appropriate....
...Conclusion The arbitrator lacked authority to determine entitlement to fees, and the award of fees pursuant to section
713.29 was not authorized because Mott’s Contracting failed to satisfy the requirements of the statute. Further, since the lien became unenforceable pursuant to section
713.22 prior to the issuance of the award due to Mott’s Contracting’s failure to file an enforcement action in court, the arbitrator could not have determined its validity or entitlement to fees pursuant thereto....
...hat the arbitrator may decide without the agreement of the parties.”). However, there was no finding of express waiver and the circuit court’s decision is not based on such. . The Snells shortened this prescribed period to sixty days pursuant to section 713.22(2)....
CopyCited 1 times | Published | Florida 4th District Court of Appeal | 2017 WL 1018521, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 3435
...consistent with the construction given to limitations periods contained in other lien statutes. For example, Florida’s Construction Lien Law contains a limitations section which is almost identical in structure to the one contained in Chapter 162. Section 713.22 is also titled “Duration of Lien” and, in pertinent part, states: A lien provided by this part does not continue for a longer period than 1 year after the claim of lien has been recorded or 1 year after the recording of an amended claim of lien that shows a later date of final furnishing of labor, services, or materials, unless within that time an action to enforce the lien is commenced in a court of competent jurisdiction. § 713.22(1), Fla....
CopyCited 1 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal
...Only Moody remains party plaintiff under count IV. Appellants first argue that the court erred in not entering summary judgment as to count IV of the amended complaint because Moody failed to perfect his lien by not filing suit within one year after he filed his claim of lien as required by Section 713.22(1)....
CopyCited 1 times | Published | Florida 4th District Court of Appeal | 1991 WL 22530
...Appellees had filed notices, contesting the claims of lien; and the court clerk certified the mailing of copies of these notices on July 27, 1989, to appellant, which received them the following day. Appellees raised the affirmative defense of untimeliness because of section
713.22(2), Florida Statutes (1989), then moved for summary judgment on this ground and also on the ground that appellant failed to serve the Notice to Owner properly as required by section
713.06(2)(a)....
...The trial court entered summary final judgment in favor of appellees. In its order on rehearing, the trial court found for appellees on the question of untimeliness, but that appellant had complied with the notice to owner requirement. Appellant claims its actions were not barred under section
713.22(2) and appellees cross-appeal the finding that appellant had met the Notice to Owner provisions of section
713.06(2)(a)....
...It contends that the statement in the notice, "That the time within which you may file suit to enforce your lien is limited to sixty (60) days from the date of service of this Notice," leads a reasonable person to believe the time started running when the notice actually was received. However, the last sentence of section 713.22(2) unambiguously states that "service shall be deemed complete upon mailing." Hence, appellant's second argument also fails....
...The applicable mechanic's lien statute provides: "No lien provided by part I shall continue for a longer period than 1 year after the claim of lien has been recorded, unless within that time an action to enforce the lien is commenced." Fla. Stat. Sec. 713.22(1)....
...The Rules of Court uniformly prescribe that in computing time, the day of the event from which the period of time begins to run shall not be included. Rule 1.090(a) Fla.R.Civ.P., Rule 3.040 Fla.R. Crim.P., Rule 9.420(e) Fla.R.App.P. Id. at 1043. Here, section 713.22(2), Florida Statutes (1989), provides: (2) An owner or his agent or attorney may elect to shorten the time prescribed in subsection (1) within which to commence an action to enforce any claim of lien or claim against a bond or other security under s....
...gh material on the subject about mailings, receipts, private agreements for notice and the like. The mechanic's lien law needs simplicity in its application. The late Sam Ervin's observation about things being fixed that "ain't broke" comes to mind. Section 713.22(2) does not need "fixin" in my view.
CopyCited 1 times | Published | Florida 2nd District Court of Appeal | 1994 WL 7699
...PER CURIAM. In this case we are called upon to decide whether the method of time computation prescribed by Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.090(a) applies to the time period within which an action to enforce a construction lien must be commenced under section 713.22(1), Florida Statutes (1991)....
...Count II is an action against Southeastern for breach of contract. Lehmann filed its claim of lien on March 8, 1991. The initial complaint to foreclose the construction lien was filed on Monday, March 9, 1992, 366 days after the claim of lien was filed. Section 713.22(1), Florida Statutes (1991), provides that: No lien provided by part 1 shall continue for a longer period than 1 year after the claim of lien has been recorded, unless within that time an action to enforce the lien is commenced in a court of competent jurisdiction....
...Because we have determined that the computations of rule 1.090(a) apply to the time period within which notice must be served on the owner under section
713.06(2)(a), we hold that they also apply to the period within which an action to enforce the lien must be commenced under section
713.22(1)....
CopyCited 1 times | Published | Florida 4th District Court of Appeal | 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 12474
...Smith of Greenspoon Marder, P.A., Fort
Lauderdale, for appellee.
MAY, J.
Homeowners appeal an order denying their motion for release of a lien
transfer bond. They argue the trial court erred in denying their motion
and imposing notice on the contractor’s counsel, which is not required by
section 713.22(2), Florida Statutes (2016)....
...On July 27, 2016, the clerk recorded
a certificate of transfer and mailed a copy to the contractor with the notice
of contest.
On October 10, 2016, the homeowners moved to release the bond,
dismiss the foreclosure complaint, and discharge the lis pendens. They
argued that under sections
713.22 and
713.24, Florida Statutes, the
property was released from the lien because the contractor failed to file
suit against the surety within sixty days of the recording of their notice of
contest....
...bond, the lien was transferred to the bond surety and the property was
released from the lien. See §
713.24(1), Fla. Stat. (2016). Once they
recorded a notice of contest of lien, the contractor had sixty days to file
suit against the bond surety to enforce the lien. See §
713.22(2)....
...o a corporate
officer or its counsel. It claims that it did not receive notice until after the
sixty days expired.
No one disputes the homeowners followed the statutory procedure.
But, the contractor argues that the statutory notice provision of section
713.22(2) violates due process because it does not require service on
opposing counsel or that the lienor be informed that an additional suit
2
must be filed....
...They posted a lien transfer bond and recorded a notice
of contest of the lien. The clerk properly noticed the contractor. Because
the contractor did not file suit against the surety within sixty days, the lien
was automatically extinguished by operation of law, and the clerk was
obligated to release the bond. See §§
713.22(2),
713.24(4); see also Hiller
v....
CopyCited 1 times | Published | Florida 3rd District Court of Appeal
...en pursuant to Section
713.24, Florida Statutes (1971), "Transfer of liens to security." [1] 5. On May 16, 1972, the clerk of the circuit court executed and served by registered mail a Notice of Contest of Lien upon Fred McGilvray, Inc., pursuant to Section
713.22, Florida Statutes (1971)....
...Hunt Construction Co., Inc.; Vic Tanny International; and Westland Mall, Inc. Neither Vic Tanny of Florida nor the surety on the transfer bond was party to the suit. 7. On July 21, 1972, the clerk returned the bond to Vic Tanny of Florida, Inc., because no suit had been filed on the bond within the time limited by Section 713.22, Florida Statutes (1971)....
...This statute provides an absolute right by which property may be freed from a mechanic's lien thereby transferring all the rights of the lienor from the property to the security. Subsection (4) of the cited section provides: "(4) If no proceeding to enforce a transferred lien shall be commenced within the time specified in § 713.22 or if it appears that the transferred lien has been satisfied of record, the clerk shall return said security upon request of the person depositing or filing the same, or the insurer." The record affirmatively shows that the lien was transf...
CopyPublished | District Court of Appeal of Florida | 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 7364, 1990 WL 140298
PER CURIAM. We affirm the summary judgment entered in favor of appellee, a defendant in this mortgage foreclosure suit who, as cross-claimant, filed its claim against other appellees to foreclose a mechanic’s lien. We agree that section 713.22(1), Florida Statutes (1987), did not preclude the cross-claim....
CopyPublished | Florida 4th District Court of Appeal | 9 Fla. L. Weekly 2093, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 15222
allegation that the suit was not timely filed. See §
713.22(1), Fla.Stat. (1983). Appellee moved to dismiss
CopyPublished | Florida 4th District Court of Appeal
...Contractor sued Owner in April 2019 alleging three counts. Count 1
alleged a claim to foreclose a construction lien which the trial court
dismissed. Contractor alleged that it served the claim of lien and recorded
it on May 1, 2018, thus the suit was timely. See § 713.22, Fla....
CopyPublished | District Court of Appeal of Florida | 1975 Fla. App. LEXIS 15009
...the right to institute an action. It is not necessary that we pass on the appellants’ contention at this time. If the act of the plaintiff in failing, without cause, to deliver the summons to the sheriff until after the 60-day period set forth in § 713.22, Fla.Stat., constitutes in law a defense to the action, such defense may not be asserted as a ground for a motion to dismiss but must be asserted by answer....
CopyPublished | District Court of Appeal of Florida | 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 3908, 1991 WL 66669
...service. AFFIRM. PETERSON and GRIFFIN, JJ., concur. . Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.120(c) authorizes a pleading to aver generally that all conditions precedent have been performed or have occurred. In this action the one year period provided in section 713.22, Florida Statutes, for the bringing of an action to foreclose the mechanics’ lien ran before the landowners Lopez raised the issue that the contractor had not served the required contractor's affidavit, therefore, it was too late for the contractor to file the affidavit....
CopyPublished | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 2677, 2004 WL 401387
...After the matter was transferred to circuit court, the appellees moved to dismiss the appellant’s action against the security bond on the basis that the appellant had not timely initiated an action against the security bond in a court of competent jurisdiction as required by sections
713.22 and
713.24(4), Florida Statutes (2000)....
...Co.,
679 So.2d 78, 78-79 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996); Stel-Den of America, Inc. v. Roof Structures, Inc.,
438 So.2d 882, 884 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983). Moreover, unless an owner elects to shorten the time for filing an action against a bond by following the procedures set forth in section
713.22(2), Florida Statutes, an action against a transferred lien must be filed — in the circuit court — within one year of the date that the transferred lien is recorded or the security must be returned. See §§
713.22(1) & (2);
713.24(4), Fla....
CopyPublished | District Court of Appeal of Florida | 13 Fla. L. Weekly 1363, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 2518, 1988 WL 59152
...ure sale. Having determined that the mechanics liens of all of the appellees/lien-ors, with the exception of Florida Rock Industries, Inc., were discharged upon failure of those appellees to file an enforcement action within one year, as required by section 713.22(1), Florida Statutes (1985), we agree with the Scotts that their mortgage lien was entitled to priority over, and the exclusion of, all of these discharged liens....
...Most of the lienors didn’t answer the Hauflers’ foreclosure complaint, and only one, Florida Rock Industries, Inc. (Florida Rock), filed a counterclaim, seeking foreclosure of its mechanics lien. Florida Rock’s counterclaim was filed within one year from the time it filed its claim of lien, as required by section 713.22(1)....
...Bass, Central Builder Supplies of Gainesville, Inc., Chance, Eng & Denman, Inc., Guy Cleveland, Jimmy Cleveland, Shine Company, Inc., and Berry J.C. Walker were entitled to first priority to the surplus proceeds, and that the Scotts’ claim, to the surplus was subordinate to the claims of these appellees. Section 713.22(1) provides in pertinent part: 713.22 Duration of lien.— (1) No lien provided by part I shall continue for a longer period than 1 year after the claim of lien has been recorded, unless within that time an action to enforce the lien is commenced in a court of competent jurisdiction.......
...ment of Florida Rock and the Scotts to the surplus proceeds. Schroth v. Cape Coral Bank,
377 So.2d 50 (Fla. 2nd DCA 1979). 2 JOANOS and ZEHMER, JJ., concur. . For further clarification, on this issue, see the statutory history of sections
713.21 and
713.22, Florida Statutes, contained in 20A....
CopyPublished | District Court of Appeal of Florida | 1972 Fla. App. LEXIS 6382
...at. § 713.-22(2), F.S.A.? This appears to be a novel question in Florida; and while appellant has cited to this court a Missouri case and a Louisiana case, an examination of the statutes in those states shows they differ from our statute. Fla.Stat. § 713.22(2), F.S.A., provides the process by which a property owner may accelerate the time for bringing to issue the controversy which brought about the claim of lien....
...foreclosure suit must be brought within the sixty-day period following the notice of contest. Therefore, since the appellant voluntarily dismissed his suit to foreclose the lien and did not file the second suit within the sixty days provided for in Section 713.22(2), the court was correct in dismissing his suit with prejudice....
CopyPublished | District Court of Appeal of Florida | 1977 Fla. App. LEXIS 15791
...aim in this action”, which it promptly did. This cross-claim, insofar as it attempted to establish a mechanic’s lien, was then dismissed, upon motion, for failure to file same within one year of the recording of said claim of lien, pursuant to F.S. 713.22(1) (1975)....
CopyPublished | District Court of Appeal of Florida | 10 Fla. L. Weekly 1463, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 14949
COBB, Chief Judge. The issue on this appeal is whether the date of service is counted in computing the sixty-day time period in section 713.22(2), Florida Statutes (1983)....
CopyPublished | Florida 4th District Court of Appeal
...Allowing the amendment would have prejudiced Krips because the
statute of limitations had run on the lien foreclosure claim, so it was too
late to cure the notice problem. Krips was required to file the foreclosure
action within one year of recording its claim of lien. See § 713.22(1), Fla.
Stat....
CopyPublished | District Court of Appeal of Florida | 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 308, 1995 WL 18383
...HARRIS, C.J., and GOSHORN, J., Concur. . The amended claim of lien merely increased the amount claimed to be owed from $19,150 to $19,250 and, thus, the issue of good faith reli-anee by any party is not presented in this case. See §
713.08(4)(b), Fla.Stat. (1991). . See §
713.22(1), Fla.Stat....
CopyPublished | District Court of Appeal of Florida
filing of a suit to enforce a mechanic’s lien under §
713.22(1), F.S.1973, on Monday following expiration of
CopyPublished | District Court of Appeal of Florida | 1976 Fla. App. LEXIS 14322
...When a lien is transferred to a bond an action to enforce the transferred lien must commence within the time specified for action on the lien itself. See Fla.Stat. §
713.24(4), which provides in pertinent part: If no proceeding to enforce a transferred lien shall be commenced within the time specified in §
713.22 the clerk shall return said security upon request of the person depositing or filing the same, or the insurer....
CopyPublished | District Court of Appeal of Florida | 14 Fla. L. Weekly 346, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 447, 1989 WL 6312
...tional security, reduction of security, change or substitution of sureties, payment of discharge thereof, or any other matter affecting said security. (4) If no proceeding to enforce a transferred lien shall be commenced within the time specified in section 713.22 or if it appears that the transferred lien has been satisfied of record, the clerk shall return said security upon request of the person depositing or filing the same, or the insurer....
CopyPublished | Florida 4th District Court of Appeal | 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 19757, 2003 WL 23095239
...We address this case upon a certified question from the county court pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.030(b)(4)(A). We rephrase the certified question as follows: WHERE AN OWNER FILES A NOTICE OF CONTEST OF A CONTRACTOR’S LIEN PURSUANT TO SECTION 713.22, FLORIDA STATUTES (2000), MUST A CONTRACTOR SEEKING TO FORECLOSE THE LIEN FILE ITS FINAL CONTRACTOR’S AFFIDAVIT NO LATER THAN THE 60 DAY LIMITATION PERIOD PROVIDED FOR IN SECTION 713.22(2)? We answer the question in the affirmative and affirm....
...e. After a claim of lien against an owner is recorded pursuant to section
713.08, Florida Statutes (2000), the lien is valid for one year, “unless within that time an action to enforce the lien is commenced in a court of competent jurisdiction.” §
713.22(1), Fla. Stat. (2000). An owner may “shorten” the one-year time period if the owner files a notice of contest of lien pursuant to section
713.22(2). Such a notice shortens the statute of limitations to “60 days after service of such notice.” Id. The statute provides:
713.22....
...by recording in the clerk’s office a notice [of contest of lien] [[Image here]] The lien of any lienor upon whom such notice is served and who fails to institute a suit to enforce his or her lien *416 within 60 days after service of such notice shall be extinguished automatically. (Emphasis added). It is the section 713.22(2) 60 day period that is the applicable statute of limitations in this case. The purpose of the notice of contest is to “shorten the time ... within which to commence an action to enforce any claim of lien.... ” § 713.22(2). Like other statutes of limitation, section 713.22(2) bars an action to enforce a lien not filed within its 60 day time frame....
...e November 3, 2000 filing of the lawsuit. Case law excuses the failure to file a contractor’s affidavit prior to filing suit to enforce the lien; however, in this case, such filing must have been accomplished within the 60 day limitation period of section 713.22(2)....
...t the contractor was “ ‘foreclosed’ from foreclosing on its claim of lien.” Id. Applying Roberts and Privas to this case, Pierson is precluded from foreclosing on his lien. The operable statute of limitations is the 60 day period provided by section 713.22(2)....
CopyPublished | Florida 3rd District Court of Appeal
...erty); §
713.08,
2
Fla. Stat. (2022) (prescribing the recordation requirements for a claim of lien).
On January 11, 2023, Burleigh House recorded a notice contesting First
response’s claim of lien. See §
713.22(2), Fla....
...restoration work that First Response had allegedly performed at Burleigh
House’s property. Burleigh House filed a responsive pleading and then
moved for summary judgment.
In its summary judgment motion, Burleigh House argued that
Hernandez’s lawsuit is time-barred by section 713.22(2) of the Florida
Statutes....
...opinion in Doral Collision Center, Inc. v. Daimler Trust,
341 So. 3d 424 (Fla.
3d DCA 2022), held that Hernandez’s unjust enrichment claim “is based on
precisely the same services upon which the Claim of Lien was based,” and
that Hernandez cannot “circumvent” section
713.22(2)’s time requirements
for filing a lien enforcement action by “calling the lien claim one for unjust
enrichment.” Further, the trial court held that “Florida Statute §
713.30 does
not save [Hernandez] because his unjust en...
CopyPublished | Florida 4th District Court of Appeal
...Contractor sued Owner in April 2019 alleging three counts. Count 1
alleged a claim to foreclose a construction lien which the trial court
dismissed. Contractor alleged that it served the claim of lien and recorded
it on May 1, 2018, thus the suit was timely. See § 713.22, Fla....
CopyPublished | United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida | 1981 Bankr. LEXIS 3194
...endant. In addition, the Defendant attacks the claim for a mechanics lien on the ground that the Defendant failed to institute an action in a Court of competent jurisdiction to enforce its mechanics lien claim within 60 days as required by Fla.Stat. 713.22(2) when the lien claim is contested and therefore upon expiration of the 60 days the lien became automatically extinguished....
...The legislature in enacting this remedial legislation designed it to benefit material-men and laborers who contribute to the improvement of land. The statute places certain conditions on the enforcement of a lien right. One of these conditions is set forth in Fla.Stat. § 713.22 which provides in sub-clause (2) that the lien of any lienor upon whom a notice of contest is served must institute a suit to enforce the lien within 60 days after service of such notice and if he fails to do so the lien is extinguished automatically (emphasis supplied)....
CopyPublished | Florida 3rd District Court of Appeal
...On December 23, 2021, Woolems filed a motion for release of its
Cost Deposit. Woolems asserted that pursuant to section
713.24(4),
Catalina was required to file suit against Woolems within one year, unless
shortened by operation of law as provided by sections
713.22(1) and (2),
Florida Statutes. Woolems contended that under section
713.22, Stone
House’s notice of contest of lien filed June 29, 2021, recorded in July 2021,
and noticed to Catalina by the Clerk of Court in October 2021, gave
Catalina sixty days after the October certification of service of such notice
to file suit against Woolems. Woolems contended that, as applied, section
713.22 indicates that, because the lienor (Catalina) did not file suit to
enforce its claim of lien as against the lien’s owner (Woolems) within sixty
days, the lien was automatically extinguished.
On the same day Woolems filed its...
...for release of its Cost Deposit. The trial court bifurcated the arguments into
1) the timing issue related to Catalina’s alleged failure to sue Woolems on
the Cost Deposit security within sixty days of service of Woolems’ notice of
contest, pursuant to section 713.22, Florida Statutes, and 2) whether
2
Stone House also moved to dismiss Catalina’s remaining counts against it
for quantum meruit and unjust enrichment, or to abate....
...3d DCA 2007).
Analysis
The trial court correctly applied the relation-back doctrine to find that
Catalina’s amended counterclaim against Woolems was timely filed, although
it was filed outside the limitations period provided by sections 713.22 and .24,
3
The trial court stated that, because this was an in rem action against an
alternate security and not the Stone House property, Catalina’s counts 2
and 3 (quantum meruit and unjust enrichment) against Stone House were
essentially eliminated....
...None of
those elements are present here.
We conclude that Catalina’s amended counterclaim asserted against
Woolems related back to its original and timely-filed contest of lien against
Stone House. The lien was thus not automatically extinguished by operation
of sections 713.22(1) and (2), Florida Statutes, and Catalina’s claim against
the alternate security – the Cost Deposit – can proceed....
CopyPublished | Florida 2nd District Court of Appeal
...nging both of the trial
court's rulings as departures from the essential requirements of the law.
Because Hall has not demonstrated any departure, we deny the petition.
We write to discuss Hall's contention that the trial court misconstrued
sections
713.22 and
713.24, Florida Statutes (2022),1 in concluding that
Hall's claim of lien was extinguished by operation of law.
BACKGROUND
The parties entered into a contract in March 2020, under which
Canoe Creek was to pay Hall to provide construction and other services
at Canoe Creek's property....
...The
following month, on May 17, 2022, Canoe Creek transferred the Original
Claim of Lien to a lien transfer bond pursuant to section
713.24(1)(b).
Three days later, on May 20, 2022, Canoe Creek recorded a notice of
contest of Hall's lien pursuant to section
713.22(2).
In late May 2022, Hall recorded an amended claim of lien on Canoe
Creek's property in the new amount of $1,837,516.76 (the Amended
Claim of Lien).
On June 14, 2022, Hall filed a five-count complaint against Canoe
Creek....
...ion
713.24(1)(b). The surety was the same as for the Original Claim of Lien.
On the same day that Canoe Creek transferred Hall's Amended Claim of
Lien to bond, Canoe Creek also recorded a notice of contest of Hall's
Amended Claim of Lien pursuant to section
713.22(2).
On December 19, 2022, five months after Canoe Creek transferred
Hall's Amended Claim of Lien to bond and recorded its notice of contest
of it, Canoe Creek moved for partial summary judgment on Count II,
Hall's claim for foreclosure of construction lien....
...to Count II, its claim for foreclosure of construction lien.
Following a hearing on May 9, 2022, the trial court granted Canoe
Creek's motion for partial summary judgment on Count II. The court
3
reasoned that under sections
713.22(2) and
713.24(1)(b) and (4), Canoe
Creek's transfer and recording of the notice of contest as to the Amended
Claim of Lien during the litigation shortened the time for Hall to bring a
claim against the bond to sixty days, and Hall's failure to timely do so
extinguished its lien automatically as a matter of law....
...Dep't of Highway Safety & Motor Vehicles,
87
So. 3d 712, 723 (Fla. 2012) (citing Ivey,
774 So. 2d at 682-83).
The Parties' Arguments
Hall contends the trial court departed from the essential
requirements of the law by misinterpreting sections
713.22 and
713.24.
Hall raises several arguments, relying principally on its factual assertion
that Canoe Creek "did not transfer their lien during this proceeding....
...Thus, as illustrated by Hiller v. Phoenix Associates of South Florida,
Inc.,
189 So. 3d 272 (Fla. 2d DCA), review denied, No. SC16–711,
2016
WL 3522783 (Fla. June 28, 2016), upon the recording of the notice of
contest of the transferred Amended Claim of Lien, section
713.22(2)
operated to shorten the time for Hall to bring a claim against the bond to
sixty days. As we now explain, because Hall did not seek to bring such a
claim within the sixty-day statutory window—instead, waiting an
additional five months after the window expired—its lien was
"extinguished automatically" as provided by section
713.22(2).
5
Statutory Analysis
Our supreme court has specified that "[t]he purpose of the fixed
periods provided in such statutory remedies as ....
...moving party does not comply with the time restrictions and notice
requirements of" chapter 713. Id. (quoting N. Am. Spec. Ins. v. Bergeron
Land Dev., Inc.,
745 So. 2d 359, 360 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999)).
The two construction lien statutes at the heart of this dispute are
section
713.22 and section
713.24. Section
713.22(1) sets a general one-
year deadline for a party who has recorded a claim of lien to bring an
action to enforce the lien....
..."Upon filing the certificate of transfer, the
real property shall thereupon be released from the lien claimed, and such
lien shall be transferred to said security." Id.
Section
713.24(4) provides that where "a proceeding to enforce a
transferred lien is not commenced within the time specified in s.
713.22,"
the clerk must return the security upon request. However, that same
subsection continues:
If a proceeding to enforce a lien is commenced in a court of
competent jurisdiction within the time specified in s.
713.22
and, during such proceeding, the lien is transferred pursuant
to this section[,] ....
...have jurisdiction over the action.
(Emphasis added.)
Construing these two statutes together, this court has expressly
held that the "unless otherwise shortened by operation of law" language
in section
713.24(4) encompasses the time-shortening provision of
section
713.22(2). Hiller,
189 So. 3d at 275 ("Pursuant to the 'unless
7
otherwise shortened by operation of law' language in section
713.24(4),
section
713.22(2) allows the owner to shorten the time period to
commence an action on the security by filing a notice of contest ....
...transferred to a bond during litigation, and the owner records a notice of
contest, the lienor has "60 days" "within which to commence an action to
enforce any claim of lien or claim against a bond," or else the "lien . . .
shall be extinguished automatically." See §§ 713.22(2), .24(4); Hiller, 189
So....
...l one.
Thus, after Hall commenced litigation on its Amended Claim of
Lien, Canoe Creek's actions in transferring the Amended Claim of Lien to
bond under section
713.24 and then recording its notice of contest of the
Amended Claim of Lien under section
713.22(2) operated to shorten the
8
time period for Hall to bring an action against the surety on the bond to
sixty days....
...When Canoe Creek,
as the owner of the property, recorded its notice of contest of the
transferred Amended Claim of Lien, that "shorten[ed] the time . . . within
which to commence an action to enforce any claim of lien or claim
against a bond or other security." See § 713.22(2) (emphasis added).
Hall's failure to seek to claim against the bond within sixty days
thereafter caused its lien to "be extinguished automatically" by operation
of law....
...of lien,"
citing to Jack Stilson & Co.,
278 So. 2d at 283. Although this general
proposition is true, it does not operate to preserve the lien past its
express statutory endpoint.
In addition to the foregoing plain language analysis of sections
713.22 and
713.24, section
713.08(4)(b) states that claims of lien "may
be amended at any time during the period allowed for recording such
claim of lien, provided that such amendment shall not cause any person...
...Other cases likewise follow this pattern.
See, e.g., Hiller,
189 So. 3d at 273-74 (stating that Hiller "post[ed] a
transfer bond thereby transferring the lien on the real property to a
surety bond and removing the cloud on her property's title. Hiller then
filed a notice of contest under section
713.22(2)" (emphasis added));
Rabil, 226 So....
...second plaintiff as party).
Hall also relies on Woolems, in which the Third District affirmed a
ruling that an amended counterclaim to enforce a lien "was timely filed,
although it was filed outside the limitations period provided by sections
713.22 and .24," based on the relation-back doctrine....
