Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 713.31
CopyCited 56 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 18 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 607, 1993 Fla. LEXIS 1862, 1993 WL 471264
...As a consequence, the court entered judgment in favor of the contractor for $17,309.06 but denied the contractor's claim for attorney's fees. The court also denied the owner's claim for attorney's fees (1) under section
713.29, Florida Statutes (1989), on the premise that he was not the prevailing party and (2) under section
713.31, Florida Statutes (1989), because the fraudulent affidavits were not used as the basis for the lien and the final affidavit correctly stated the amount which was due and owing....
CopyCited 55 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida
...e in any construction. See id. 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....
CopyCited 12 times | Published | United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Florida. | 6 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. B 1, 1992 Bankr. LEXIS 293
...*580 Claiming the lien to be fraudulent, Fairway filed its Emergency Petition For Cancellation Of Fraudulent Lien, Damages And Other Relief in the Circuit Court of Dade County, Florida, on June 20, 1989. The Petition expressly alleged that Kecskes willfully violated Sections
713.31 and
713.03, Florida Statutes (1989) by filing fraudulent liens against Fairway's property and property owned by other plaintiffs. The Petition sought compensatory damages and punitive damages pursuant to §
713.31(2)(c)....
...absence of personal hatred, spite or ill will.'" Scotella,
18 B.R. at 977; See also, 3 LAWRENCE P. KING et al., COLLIER ON BANKRUPTCY, Paragraph 523.16[1], at 523-129 to 523-134 (15th ed. 1991). Fairway sought and obtained compensatory damages under §
713.31, Florida Statutes (1989) which in pertinent part provides as follows: (2)(a) Any lien asserted under this part in which the lienor has ....
...audulent lien. (emphasis supplied) (c) . . . The lienor who files a fraudulent lien shall be liable to the owner or the defrauded party in damages . . . and punitive damages. From the statutory language, it is clear that a judgment for damages under § 713.31(2)(a) can only arise from willful conduct....
...liens against the Property. Like the debtors in Klayminc, the Debtor here acted without just cause or excuse. His conduct was "malicious" within the meaning of the statute. In sum, this Court is satisfied that the compensatory damages awarded under § 713.31 arose from willful and malicious conduct by the Debtor....
...f plaintiff's allegations to constitute an opportunity to litigate. To be more specific, the June 1989 "Emergency Petition For Cancellation of Fraudulent Lien, Damages And Other Relief" cited thrice to § 713 and to the punitive damages provision of § 713.31(c)(2)....
CopyCited 10 times | Published | Florida 2nd District Court of Appeal | 12 Fla. L. Weekly 1373
...Appellee/cross-appellant (Owner) counterclaimed in three counts seeking compensatory damages for breach of the construction contract for failure of satisfactory performance and on a theory of constructive fraud, and a claim for punitive damages under the provisions of section 713.31, Florida Statutes (1983), alleging that Contractor exaggerated its claim of lien....
...The Contractor's mechanic's lien foreclosure and Owner's claim based on Contractor's alleged exaggerated lien were both tried before the court. The trial judge, because the jury returned a verdict for Contractor in an amount substantially less than his claim of lien, reluctantly concluded that section 713.31 required him to find that the claim of lien filed by Contractor was an "exaggerated claim" regardless of Contractor's "good-faith" in filing the claim. Therefore, under the terms of section 713.31(2)(b), the trial judge declared that the amount the jury found was owed *1130 Contractor under its contract with Owner was unenforceable as a claim of lien. The trial judge also reluctantly concluded that section 713.31(2)(c) required an award to Owner of punitive damages in an amount equal to the difference between the amount claimed by Contractor and the amount found due it by the jury verdict....
...ractor's damages. We find no merit in either of those issues. Contractor also asserts as error the trial court's findings, and awards based thereon, that Contractor's claim of lien was a willfully exaggerated claim and, therefore, under the terms of section 713.31(2)(a), a fraudulent lien....
...atement relevant and, therefore, no error was committed by allowing its introduction. We, therefore, affirm in regard to Owner's cross-appeal. We now turn to an explanation of why we find that the trial judge erred when he reluctantly concluded that section 713.31, under the circumstances of this case, mandated his finding Contractor's claim of lien unenforceable, and further mandated his award of punitive or "statutory damages" to Owner....
...NT COMPANY take nothing by this action and the Defendant PETER W. CONNELL go hence without day [sic]. 4. On the Claim of the Defendant/Counterplaintiff PETER W. CONNELL against VINCI DEVELOPMENT COMPANY asserting that a fraudulent lien existed under Section 713.31, Florida Statutes, another claim which was tried before the Court, it is adjudged that the lien was exaggerated and therefore the lien is invalid as a matter of law and that the Counterplaintiff PETER W....
...erated *1132 lien claim and hence the Defendant/Counterplaintiff PETER W. CONNELL shall recover from VINCI DEVELOPMENT COMPANY the sum of Twenty Five Thousand Four Hundred Nine and 89/100 ($25,409.89) Dollars together with costs and attorneys' fees. Section 713.31(2)(a) defines a fraudulent lien as covered therein in three ways....
...A subsequent dispute between the parties as to the amount of compensation due according to the contract plan of compensation or even a dispute as to the method of compensation provided in the contract does not convert such a good faith dispute into a fraudulent lien as provided in section 713.31....
...er has a good faith dispute with the owner as to the method of compensation for that work. We could end our discussion at this point since we have concluded that Contractor's claim of lien did not constitute a fraudulent lien under the provisions of section 713.31, *1133 and therefore, the trial judge should not have refused to enforce the lien. However, because of the apparent confusion that exists regarding the circumstances under which punitive damages are appropriate pursuant to section 713.31, we will extend our discussion to that subject....
...f the exaggerated lien... ." In the amended final judgment, he enters judgment for that "amount as to which the lien was exaggerated as statutory damages ... ." (Emphasis supplied.) He, thus, mistakenly equates the "punitive damages" provided for in section 713.31 with "statutory damages" which he obviously reluctantly concluded was mandated by the statute....
...We, therefore, affirm the jury verdict and resulting judgment which awarded Contractor $10,791.43 as its remaining compensation due on its contract with Owner. We reverse the final judgment insofar as it finds Contractor's claim of lien fraudulent under section 713.31 and remand for enforcement of the lien....
CopyCited 10 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal
...Staats of Staats & Nabors, Panama City, for appellant. Marvin A. Urquhart, Jr., of Urquhart & Austin, Panama City, for appellee. SMITH, Judge. By default a judgment was entered against Scott canceling his recorded mechanics lien under §
713.21(4), F.S. 1973, declaring it fraudulent under §
713.31(2) (a) and retaining jurisdiction to assess against Scott compensatory and punitive damages, costs and reasonable attorneys fees incurred by Premium Development, Inc., in obtaining discharge of the lien....
...prime contractor. Secs.
713.01-.36, F.S. 1973. The claim of lien was recorded in accordance with §
713.08. Premium responded on May 14 by filing a complaint in the circuit court for discharge of the lien and for damages and other relief accorded by §
713.31 against fraudulent liens....
...'s] Complaint," the affidavit contains no factual showing either that the lien should not have been enforced by action before June 3 or forthwith cancelled [§
713.21(4)] or that Scott did not willfully exaggerate in asserting a lien of $136,971.16 [§
713.31(2)(a)]....
CopyCited 10 times | Published | Florida 2nd District Court of Appeal | 2002 WL 31875183
...(2001) (defendants who install mobile homes); §
376.09(4), Fla. Stat. (2001) (remove cargo ship pollution); §
418.302, Fla. Stat. (2001) (certain activities at mobile home parks);
627.728, Fla. Stat. (2001) (duty owed by insurance companies that disclose false information in cancellation letter); §
713.31(2)(a), Fla....
CopyCited 9 times | Published | Florida 3rd District Court of Appeal | 12 Fla. L. Weekly 1827
...We therefore hold the trial court erred when it ruled that collateral estoppel barred litigation of U.S. Development's guardrail claim against Volpe. Next, U.S. Development asserts that Volpe's claim of lien is fraudulent and therefore invalid. We agree. § 713.31(2)(a), (b), Fla....
...Claims for breach of contract and for negligence are not necessarily incompatible. Robertson v. Deak Perera (Miami), Inc.,
396 So.2d 749, 750 (Fla. 3d DCA), review denied,
407 So.2d 1105 (Fla. 1981); Robsol, Inc. v. Garris,
358 So.2d 865 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978). [2] Section
713.31(2)(a), (b), Fla....
CopyCited 9 times | Published | Florida 3rd District Court of Appeal | 1998 WL 187449
...ed a claim for work not performed upon or materials not furnished for the property upon which the lienor seeks to impress such lien; and/or (3) has compiled the claim with such willful and gross negligence as to amount to a willful exaggeration. See § 713.31(2)(a), Fla....
...Co.,
511 So.2d 642, 644 n. 2 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987); Hobbs Constr. & Dev., Inc. v. Presbyterian Homes of the Synod of Fla.,
440 So.2d 673, 673 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983). A determination that a lien is fraudulent is a complete defense to the enforcement of the lien. See §
713.31(2)(b), Fla. Stat. (1991). However, section
713.31(2)(b) was amended in 1991 to preclude the finding of a fraudulent lien based upon a minor mistake or a good faith dispute as to the amount owed....
...*665 Based upon our affirmance of the lower court's determination that Delta's lien was fraudulent, we likewise conclude that the Baumanns were entitled to their reasonable attorney's fees and costs incurred in securing the discharge of this lien. See § 713.31(2)(c), Fla....
...The homeowners had asserted a claim that Delta's mechanic's lien was fraudulent. The trial court sat as the trier of fact on this claim and ruled that the mechanic's lien was fraudulent. Delta has appealed. The claim of fraudulent lien in this case is governed by section 713.31, Florida Statutes (1991)....
...dd, "However, a minor mistake or error in a claim of lien, or a good faith dispute as to the amount due does not constitute a willful exaggeration that operates to defeat an otherwise valid lien." Ch. 90-109, § 15, at 329, Laws of Fla. (codified at § 713.31(2)(b), Fla....
...had substantially complied with its contractual obligations. Under the circumstances, we should clarify the appropriate legal standard and remand for a new hearing. [2] NOTES [1] Although not applicable to this case, in 1995 the Legislature amended section 713.31, Florida Statutes, to provide a felony penalty for the willful filing of a fraudulent lien. See ch. 95-240, § 8, at 2148, Laws of Fla. (codified at § 713.31(3), Fla. Stat. (1995)). For cases arising after 1995, this even more clearly indicates the intent of the legislature that a scienter requirement be part of section 713.31....
...To hold otherwise would be to risk inhibiting those involved in a good faith dispute from exercising their right to file a protective lien. In sum, we think the action here was one involving a breach of contract issue and does not support an award of punitive damages under section 713.31....
CopyCited 8 times | Published | Florida 4th District Court of Appeal | 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 1949, 2009 WL 605394
...The developer also contends that the construction lien was fraudulent, because the contractor willfully exaggerated the amount of the lien. "[A] good faith dispute as to the amount due does not constitute a willful exaggeration that operates *1135 to defeat an otherwise valid lien." § 713.31(2)(b), Fla....
CopyCited 8 times | Published | United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida | 1987 Bankr. LEXIS 581
...Accordingly, the plaintiffs have not met their burden of proof against Mr. Keller as to Count I. The plaintiffs have also submitted in their complaint that their claim should not be discharged because Mr. Keller, on behalf of Willow Creek Homes, Inc., filed a fraudulent lien against the residence. Florida Statutes Section 713.31(2)(a) states as follows: Any lien asserted under this part I in which the lienor has willfully exaggerated the amount for which such lien is claimed or in which the lienor has willfully included a claim for work not performed upon or m...
CopyCited 7 times | Published | Florida 3rd District Court of Appeal | 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 456, 2003 WL 141635
...This partial judgment included a provision withholding execution and reserved jurisdiction on DCC's pending claims against the lien transfer bond. The trial court denied DCC's motion for summary judgment on YCS's and the insurance company's counterclaim and affirmative defenses of fraudulent lien under Section 713.31, Florida Statutes (1999)....
CopyCited 7 times | Published | Florida 3rd District Court of Appeal | 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 598, 1995 WL 36105
...The court determined that the damages for such a breach amounted to Yanks' lost profits plus Yanks' costs expended on certain building permits. In Martin's favor, the trial judge found that the lien filed on her property by Yanks was invalid and awarded damages to Martin pursuant to section 713.31, Florida Statutes (1993)....
...2d DCA 1959); 1 Rakusin, Florida Construction Lien Manual, Ch. 3, p. 51 (1988). The asserted lien was in no way the result of a contractor's miscalculation or overestimation, but rather was a lien for non-lienable items in an amount far beyond anything that could have possibly been owed to the contractor. As section 713.31 clearly provides: (c) An owner against whose interest in real property a fraudulent lien is filed, or any contractor, subcontractor, or sub-subcontractor who suffers damages as a result of the filing of the fraudulent lien, shall have a right of action for damages occasioned thereby....
...Finally, with no contract in place, neither party could recover attorney's fees for the contract action. David v. Richman,
568 So.2d 922, 924 (Fla. 1990). Martin, however, does have a viable claim for those costs and attorney's fees associated with the removal of the fraudulent lien. See §
713.31(2)(c), Fla....
CopyCited 7 times | Published | Florida 2nd District Court of Appeal | 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 5943, 2011 WL 1565446
...not performed upon or materials not furnished for the property upon which he or she seeks to impress such lien or in which the lienor has compiled his or her claim with such willful and gross negligence as to amount to a willful exaggeration. . . . § 713.31(2)(a)....
...But "`a minor mistake or error in a claim of lien, or a good faith dispute as to the amount due does not constitute a willful exaggeration that operates to defeat an otherwise valid lien.'" Sharrard v. Ligon,
892 So.2d 1092, 1096 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004) (quoting §
713.31(2)(b))....
CopyCited 6 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal
...maximum rate. Hobbs filed a claim of lien, with sworn support that the total value of work performed was $8,043,142.09, with an outstanding balance of $677,023.15. Presbyterian Homes and Leon County counterclaimed that the lien was fraudulent under § 713.31, Fla....
...on. The trial court found that Hobbs should not have included in the claim of lien the amounts not authorized by the contract or change orders; such inclusion amounting to a willful exaggeration, and therefore a fraudulent lien within the meaning of Section 713.31(2), Florida Statutes. Section 713.31(2)(a), Florida Statutes (1981), provides that any mechanic's lien in which the lienor has willfully exaggerated the amount or has compiled the claim with such willful and gross negligence as to amount to a willful exaggeration shall be deemed a fraudulent lien. The determination that a lien is fraudulent is a complete defense to enforcement of the lien. Section 713.31(2)(b), Fla....
CopyCited 6 times | Published | Florida 3rd District Court of Appeal | 1998 WL 103747
...The jury could have found this documentation to be adequate and amounts contained therein to be reasonable. As for the fraudulent lien claim, a lien is fraudulent when a "lienor has willfully exaggerated the amount... or in which the lienor has willfully included a claim for work not performed ...." § 713.31(2)(a), Fla....
CopyCited 6 times | Published | Florida 2nd District Court of Appeal | 1988 WL 54544
...Sun 'N Lake terminated the contract after having paid Dorsky $30,000, and Dorsky filed a claim of lien against Sun 'N Lake's real property for an additional $53,532.87. Dorsky sued to foreclose its claim of lien, and Sun 'N Lake counterclaimed alleging that Dorsky had filed a fraudulent claim of lien as defined in section 713.31, Florida Statutes (1985)....
...To hold otherwise would be to risk inhibiting those involved in a good faith dispute from exercising their right to file a protective lien. In sum, we think the action here was one involving a breach of contract issue and does not support an award of punitive damages under section 713.31....
CopyCited 6 times | Published | Florida 4th District Court of Appeal
...Upon motion of appellants, the court granted a stay of execution upon these awards pending final resolution of all appeals. Nezelek appeals, contesting the propriety of the stay. Gesco now contends that Nezelek's lien was premature and therefore should be considered fraudulent and invalid pursuant to Section 713.31, Florida Statutes....
CopyCited 5 times | Published | Florida 2nd District Court of Appeal | 2004 WL 2481311
...foreclosure of the amended claim of lien, breach of contract, and quantum meruit. The Owners answered the complaint and alleged numerous affirmative defenses, including the defense that the amended claim of lien was fraudulent within the meaning of section 713.31(2)(a)....
...the amended claim of lien in the amount of $70,500. The Owners' Claim That the Lien Was Fraudulent On the cross-appeal, the Owners argue that the trial court erred in failing to find the amended claim of lien to be fraudulent and unenforceable under section 713.31(2)(a) and (b). The Owners also contend that the trial court erred in failing to award them damages on the fraudulent lien claim pursuant to section 713.31(2)(c)....
...latter under their cost-plus contract. We need not venture into this particular legal thicket because the Owners' first ground based on charges for the nonexistent workers' compensation premiums is dispositive of the fraudulent lien claim. Analysis Section 713.31(2)(a) defines a "fraudulent lien" as: Any lien asserted under this part in which the lienor has willfully exaggerated the amount for which such lien is claimed or in which the lienor has willfully included a claim for work not performe...
...ch the lienor has compiled his or her claim with such willful and gross negligence as to amount to a willful exaggeration shall be deemed a fraudulent lien. See Castiello v. Sweetwater Homes of Citrus, Inc.,
843 So.2d 1019, 1020 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003). Section
713.31(2) makes a fraudulent lien unenforceable and gives the owner a claim for compensatory damages, costs, attorney's fees, and punitive damages against a contractor who files a fraudulent lien....
...Jack Yanks Constr. Co.,
650 So.2d 120, 121-22 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995). "However, a minor mistake or error in a claim of lien, or a good faith dispute as to the amount due does not constitute a willful exaggeration that operates to defeat an otherwise valid lien." §
713.31(2)(b); see Delta Painting, Inc. v. Baumann,
710 So.2d 663, 665-66 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998) (Cope, J., dissenting) (explaining the origin and purpose of this aspect of section
713.31(2)(b))....
...y him and served on the Owners. Second, he contends that he acted pursuant to a mistaken but good faith belief that he actually had workers' compensation insurance coverage. We will consider each of the Contractor's arguments separately. Pursuant to section 713.31(2)(a), a claim of lien that overstates the amount claimed is not fraudulent unless the exaggeration was made "willfully." See Vinci Dev....
...The Contractor also argues that in including the workers' compensation insurance expense in the amount of the amended claim of lien, he acted in good faith *1098 under a mistaken belief that he had coverage. The Contractor contends that pursuant to section 713.31(2)(b), his conduct was a minor mistake or error not constituting a willful exaggeration that would defeat his lien claim....
...At $21,689.48, it represented approximately fourteen percent of the $158,843.62 amount of the amended claim of lien. Thus the inclusion of the workers' compensation premium expense in the amount of the amended claim of lien was not a "minor mistake or error" within the meaning of section 713.31(2)(b)....
...The trial court's finding to the contrary was clearly erroneous. See Bradley v. Waldrop,
611 So.2d 31, 32 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992) (explaining that the clearly erroneous standard of review applies to a finding of the trial court that rests upon undisputed evidence). [4] The Relief Granted Pursuant to section
713.31(2)(b), the fraudulent nature of the Contractor's amended claim of lien is a complete defense to its enforcement....
...*1100 Fernandez,
285 So.2d 667 (Fla. 2d DCA 1973). However, the Contractor's claim for damages will be subject to a setoff for any amounts that may be determined to be due the Owners on their claims for damages for the filing of the fraudulent lien pursuant to section
713.31(2)(c)....
...The Contractor's cost of $523,281 plus a ten percent profit of $52,328 yields a total cost to the Owners of $575,609, which is $405 more than the trial court's total of $575,204. Neither of the parties has addressed this discrepancy in their submissions to this court. [2] Section 713.31(2)(c) provides, in pertinent part: The lienor who files a fraudulent lien shall be liable to the owner or the defrauded party in damages, which shall include court costs, clerk's fees, a reasonable attorney's fee for services in securi...
CopyCited 5 times | Published | Florida 5th District Court of Appeal | 1998 WL 210548
...favor of Summerton on his breach of contract claim. As for the Mameles' counterclaims, the trial court determined that Summerton had filed a fraudulent lien against the Mameles' property and awarded the Mameles $9,000 in punitive damages pursuant to section 713.31, Florida Statutes (1993)....
CopyCited 5 times | Published | Florida 2nd District Court of Appeal
...orce
its construction lien against Coltin, the Owner, and VCC (count I).3 In response, Coltin
filed its answer, affirmative defenses, and counterclaims, which included an action to
declare Farrey's claim of lien fraudulent and unenforceable under section 713.31,
Florida Statutes (2016) (count IV)....
...2d DCA 1987) (stating that a dispute between the parties "as to
the amount of compensation due according to the contract plan of compensation or
even a dispute as to the method of compensation provided in the contract does not
convert such a good faith dispute into a fraudulent lien as provided in section 713.31"
- 14 -
(emphasis added))....
...ot furnished for the property
upon which he or she seeks to impress such lien or [3] . . .
has compiled his or her claim with such willful and gross
negligence as to amount to a willful exaggeration . . . .
§ 713.31(2)(a) (emphasis added); see also Gator Boring, 210 So....
...is not a "discretionary matter" but rather must be supported by competent substantial
evidence in the record). "[A] minor mistake or error in a claim of lien, or a good faith
dispute as to the amount due does not constitute a willful exaggeration." § 713.31(2)(b).
Here, Coltin simply failed to show that Farrey's did not have a good faith
dispute as to the amount of its claim of lien....
CopyCited 5 times | Published | Florida 3rd District Court of Appeal | 2016 WL 1445437, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 5586
...After an
evidentiary hearing, the trial court denied Wells’ motion for
57.105 fees, finding
Castro “had a legitimate good faith belief that he was the prevailing party in the
arbitration proceedings . . . [and] that he was entitled to attorney’s fees as the
prevailing party under Florida Statute §
713.31.”4 Further, the court found, Castro
3 This is the date counsel for Wells wrote to counsel for Castro, asking him to
withdraw his motion to modify the arbitration award, and attaching Wells’ first
motion for
57.105 fees.
4 Section
713.31(2)(c), Florida Statutes (2012) provides:
An owner against whose interest in real property a fraudulent lien is
filed, or any contractor, subcontractor, or sub-subcontractor who
suffers damages as a result of the fi...
...713.21, or as a counterclaim
or cross-claim to any action to enforce or to determine the validity of
8
“brought a colorable claim to be determined the prevailing party under the
authority of Hollub . . . and Florida Statute § 713.31.” Finally, the court found
that if “attorney fees sanctions are not appropriate where a party presents a
colorable claim and loses on the pleadings or on a summary judgment, attorney
fees are certainly not appropriate as a sancti...
...of new law, as it
applied to the material facts, with a reasonable expectation of success.”
In this case, the trial court denied fees because it found that Castro’s position
was “arguably supported” under the authority of Hollub and section 713.31....
CopyCited 4 times | Published | Florida 3rd District Court of Appeal
...ged both the lien and the lis pendens which had been filed upon the land. However, other claims in appellee's complaint have not been concluded, for example, claims against the construction bond posted by Midway Mall. Appellant counterclaimed, under § 713.31, Fla....
...nterclaim and struck the petition for attorney's fees as costs) is through an interlocutory appeal under Rule 4.2. Chatlos v. City of Hallendale, Fla. 1968,
220 So.2d 353, 354. The lower court did not err in dismissing the counterclaim brought under §
713.31, Fla....
CopyCited 4 times | Published | Florida 3rd District Court of Appeal | 1995 WL 421876
...When a contractor is owed money for either labor, services, materials, or other items used to improve real property in accordance with a contract, section
713.05, Florida Statutes (1993), allows a contractor to assert a claim of lien on the real property that he has improved. Section
713.31, Florida Statutes (1993), protects the owner of the property by providing a remedy for fraud or collusion on the part of the contractor. In pertinent part, section
713.31 reads as follows: (2)(a) Any lien asserted ......
...that the lien is a fraudulent lien; and the court so finding is empowered to and shall declare the lien unenforceable, and the lienor thereupon forfeits his right to any lien on the property upon which he sought to impress such fraudulent lien... . § 713.31(2)(a) & (b), Fla....
...al summary judgment. Additionally, after reviewing the record, we find that, as a matter of law, the trial court properly applied the standard set forth by the Florida Statutes for determining that a lien is fraudulent and, therefore, unenforceable. § 713.31, Fla....
CopyCited 4 times | Published | Florida 5th District Court of Appeal | 1991 WL 140859
...The owner appeals, *1065 arguing that by including items of construction damages not covered by the mechanic's lien law, the lienor "willfully [1] exaggerated the amount for which such lien [was] claimed" and that the trial judge erred in not finding and adjudicating the lien to be fraudulent under section 713.31(2)(a), Florida Statutes....
CopyCited 3 times | Published | Florida 2nd District Court of Appeal
...Count I of appellant's complaint sought to foreclose its mechanics' lien on appellees' real property in the amount of $6,395.81. Appellees answered and raised as an affirmative defense that the lien sought to be foreclosed by appellant was fraudulent, as defined in Section 713.31(2), Florida Statutes *395 (1975)....
CopyCited 3 times | Published | Florida 3rd District Court of Appeal
...Because it was hardly free from doubt that the laborers herein were not entitled to claim liens for amounts beyond actual wages, [5] it can hardly be said that they "willfully exaggerated the amount for which such lien is claimed" so as to make their liens fraudulent and thus unenforceable under Section 713.31(2), Florida Statutes (1981)....
...Markowitz Bros.,
75 So.2d 298 (Fla. 1954); Broderick v. Overhead Door Co.,
117 So.2d 240, although distinguishable on the ground that the materialman's earnings, unlike the laborer's, depend on the inclusion of these items, cannot be said to be totally inapposite. [6] Section
713.31(2), Florida Statutes (1981), provides in pertinent part: "(a) Any lien asserted under this Part I in which the lienor has willfully exaggerated the amount for which such lien is claimed ......
CopyCited 3 times | Published | Florida 5th District Court of Appeal | 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 6247, 2003 WL 2002761
...In response, the Contractor filed a construction lien in the amount of $19,762 pursuant to Chapter 713, Florida Statutes, and brought suit to foreclose the lien. The Owner answered and counterclaimed, asserting that the construction lien was fraudulent within the meaning of § 713.31, Florida Statutes, and sought damages for breach of the construction contract....
...r a total amount of $30,879. The Owner appeals arguing that the trial court abused its discretion in finding that the lien was valid, and asserting that the trial court's interpretation of the contract was incorrect. Fraudulent liens are governed by § 713.31, Florida Statutes, which provides in essence that a construction lien is considered to be fraudulent if the lienor (1) willfully exaggerates the amount of the lien claimed; or (2) willfully includes a claim for work not performed or materia...
...3d DCA 1998); Hobbs Constr. & Dev., Inc. v. Presbyterian Homes of the Synod of Fla.,
440 So.2d 673 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983). If there is a minor mistake or a good faith dispute as to the amount owed, however, the statute precludes the finding of a fraudulent lien. See §
713.31(2)(b), Florida Statutes; Delta Painting,
710 So.2d at 664....
CopyCited 3 times | Published | Florida 3rd District Court of Appeal | 1988 WL 23456
...Following a bench trial on all the claims between the parties, the trial court found that Environmental's mechanics' lien was unenforceable, "null, void and of no force or effect." The trial court further found that the lien was not willfully exaggerated in violation of section 713.31(2)(a), Florida Statutes (1983), as Metro-Centre had alleged....
CopyCited 3 times | Published | Florida 4th District Court of Appeal | 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 54
...The court found that many of the charges used to support the lien were not lienable. Overall, the court concluded that the contractor’s claim of lien “was compiled with such willful and gross negligence that it amounted to a willful exaggeration and should be deemed a fraudulent lien under Fla. Stat. § 713.31 .” The court discharged the lien, but reserved jurisdiction on the issue of the award of attorney’s fees and costs, noting that other issues remained to be determined by the court....
...The court later issued an amended final judgment in the amount of $81,641.08, which included pre-judgment interest. Both sides sought an award of attorney’s fees and costs. The homeowner sought an award of attorney’s fees and costs pursuant to section 713.31, Florida Statutes (2008), arguing that he was the prevailing party in the fraudulent lien action....
...The Homeovmer’s Appeal On appeal, the homeowner argues that the trial court reversibly erred in denying his motion for attorney’s fees and costs incurred from obtaining the discharge of the contractor’s fraudulent lien. He contends that where a party seeks attorney’s fees and costs as damages pursuant to section
713.31 (2)(c), the “significant issues” test does not apply. He argues that, because the trial court discharged the contractor’s lien as fraudulent, he was entitled to an award of his attorney’s fees and costs as damages under section
713.31(2)(c), regardless of the fact that the contractor prevailed on the remaining counts for breach of contract and quantum meruit. The contractor counters that the trial court properly denied the homeowner’s request for attorney’s fees under section
713.31(2)(c), because the trial court ruled that the contractor was the prevailing party under the “significant issues” test. The contractor argues that section
713.31 (2)(c) allows an owner to recover attorney’s fees only if the lienor who filed the fraudulent lien is not the prevailing party. Noting that the Florida Supreme Court has applied the “significant issues” test to statutory construction lien matters under section
713.29, the contractor contends that the “significant issues” test also applies to section
713.31....
...n the litigation so as to be entitled to an award of attorney’s fees under the construction lien law. Trytek,
3 So.3d at 1203 . The case before us presents the question of whether the “significant issues” test of Moritz and Prospeñ applies to section
713.31. Section
713.31(2)(c), Florida Statutes (2008), states: An owner against whose interest in real property a fraudulent lien is filed, or any contractor, subcontractor, or sub-subcontractor who suffers damages as a result of the filing of the fraudulent lien, shall have a right of action for damages occasioned thereby....
...s fee and costs for services in securing the discharge of the lien, ... and punitive damages in an amount not exceeding the difference between the amount claimed by the lienor to be due or to become due and the amount actually due or to become due. § 713.31(2)(c), Fla. Stat. (2008) (emphasis added). Notably, section 713.31(2)(c) was amended in 2007 to include a “prevailing party” standard in the fraudulent lien context. Under the previous version of section 713.31(2)(c), there was no reference to a “prevailing party,” and a lienor who filed a fraudulent lien was automatically hable for damages, including attorney’s fees. The pre-2007 version of section 713.31(2)(c) states in relevant part: “The henor who files a fraudulent hen shall be hable to the owner or the defrauded party in damages, which shall include court costs, clerk’s fees, a reasonable attorney’s fee .... ” § 713.31(2)(c), Fla. Stat. (2006). Here, the trial court properly applied the “significant issues” test of Moñtz and Prospeñ in denying the homeowner’s claim for attorney’s fees under the current version of section 713.31. First, under the plain language of section 713.31(2)(c), an “owner against whose interest in real property a fraudulent hen is filed” may recover attorney’s fees only “[i]f the henor who files a fraudulent hen is not the prevailing party.” Thus, the plain language of the statute contemplates that a henor who files a fraudulent hen could still be the prevailing party. Second, the 2007 amendment to section 713.31(2)(c) indicates that the legislature intended to eliminate a lienor’s automatic hability for attorney’s fees where the henor files a fraudulent hen....
...Moreover, the legislature is presumed to know the existing law, including judicial decisions, when it enacts or amends a statute. Cres *319 cent Miami Ctr., LLC v. Fla. Dep’t of Revenue,
903 So.2d 913, 918 (Fla. 2005). The homeowner’s argument relies on case law applying the pre-2007 version of section
713.31(2)(c). See Sharrard v. Ligon,
892 So.2d 1092, 1099-1100 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004) (under the pre-2007 version of section
713.31, the contractor’s damages for breach of contract were subject to a setoff for any amounts that may be determined to be due to the owners on their claim for damages for the filing of a fraudulent lien); Delta Painting v. Baumann,
710 So.2d 663, 664 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998) (under the pre-2007 version of section
713.31, homeowners who prevailed on a fraudulent lien counterclaim against the contractor were entitled to attorney’s fees, even though the contractor prevailed on its breach of contract claim)....
...Here, the purpose of the 2007 amendment was to replace a rigid rule of automatic liability for attorney’s fees with Prosperi’s flexible standard of awarding attorney’s fees to the prevailing party on the significant issues. Third, the equitable nature of section 713.31 counsels in favor of applying the flexible “significant issues” test of Prosperi in deciding entitlement to “prevailing party” attorney’s fees under section 713.31. In sum, the trial court properly applied the “significant issues” test of Moritz and Prosperi in denying the homeowner’s claim for attorney’s fees under section 713.31. Even if a party prevails on a fraudulent lien claim, the party must be the prevailing party in the case as a whole to be entitled to attorney’s fees under section 713.31....
...rk not performed upon or materials not furnished for the property upon which he or she seeks to impress such lien or in which the lienor has compiled his or her claim with such willful and gross negligence as to amount to a willful exaggeration .... § 713.31(2)(a), Fla....
CopyCited 2 times | Published | Florida 3rd District Court of Appeal | 1998 WL 568027
...[2] As to the Purchaser's other issues, however, we find them to be without merit. The Sellers argue on cross-appeal that there is no record support for the trial court's negative ruling on their claim that the Purchaser's statutory lien was fraudulent, as defined by section 713.31(2)(a), Florida Statutes (1995)....
...not properly part thereof. As previously noted, amounts included attorney's fees, overhead, and items previously paid for. The trial court's conclusion that the Purchaser acted on good faith, thereby precluding the finding of a fraudulent lien, see section 713.31(2)(b), Florida Statutes (1995), is simply not supported by the record. The Sellers were therefore entitled to a discharge of the lien and to damages as set forth in section 713.31(2)(c), Florida Statutes (1995)....
CopyCited 2 times | Published | Florida 2nd District Court of Appeal | 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 14801
...and costly than expected.
Westra and Travelers raised as their twelfth affirmative defense in their
amended affirmative defenses to Gator's first amended complaint their claim that
Gator's lien was fraudulent and unenforceable under section 713.31(2), Florida Statutes
(2013)....
...eged in count II of the first
amended complaint. However, count I includes claims for other damages against
Westra in addition to the claim based on the changed site conditions. These claims
remain pending. Also, Westra filed a counterclaim under section 713.31(2)(c) for the
alleged fraudulent lien against Gator that is unaffected by the orders under review....
...Bay Area Renaissance Festival of Largo, Inc.,
164 So. 3d 120, 122 (Fla. 2d DCA 2015) (quoting Schmidt v. State Farm Mut. Ins. Co.,
750 So. 2d 695, 698 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)).
With respect to remedies for fraud or collusion in a construction lien,
section
713.31 provides, in pertinent part, as follows:
(2)(a) Any lien asserted under this part in which the lienor
has willfully exaggerated the amount for which such lien is
claimed ....
...The action may be instituted
independently of any other action, or in connection with a
summons to show cause under s.
713.21, or as a
counterclaim or cross-claim to any action to enforce or to
determine the validity of the lien.
(Emphasis added.) Thus, under section
713.31(2), "[a] claim of lien that overstates the
amount claimed is not necessarily fraudulent, unless the exaggeration [was] made
- 10 -
willfully." Sam Rodgers Props., Inc....
...In concluding that the lien was fraudulent and unenforceable as a matter
of law, the trial court apparently accepted the foregoing argument. It further found that
$676,556.90 was not a minor amount when the total amount of the lien was
$889,792.70. See § 713.31(2)(b) ("[A] minor mistake or error in a claim of lien ....
...A "dispute between the
parties as to the amount of compensation due according to the contract plan of
compensation or even a dispute as to the method of compensation provided in the
contract does not convert such a good faith dispute into a fraudulent lien as provided in
section 713.31." Vinci Dev....
...s lien by
including that claim. Accordingly, the trial court erred in directing the clerk to release the
lien transfer bond and in dismissing count II in favor of Travelers. The question of
whether Gator's lien is fraudulent within the meaning of section 713.31 is an issue of
fact that remains to be decided at trial....
...hanged conditions claim. The law
is clearly established that the reduction in the amount of a lien following a good faith
dispute about the amount the lienor may recover under a contract does not render the
lien fraudulent as a matter of law. See § 713.31(2)(b); see also Politano, 9 So....
CopyCited 2 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 1991 WL 224984
...191,260 into the registry of the circuit court. Thereafter, RSW filed this action alleging that the claim of lien was invalid and constituted slander of title, and that the lien was willfully exaggerated, bringing into play the statutory remedies of section 713.31, Florida Statutes (1987)....
CopyCited 2 times | Published | Florida 3rd District Court of Appeal | 1991 WL 152903
...At the evidentiary hearing on that claim, the president of the Polo Club made contradictory statements, and ultimately invoked the fifth amendment. Immediately thereafter, counsel for the Polo Club voluntarily dismissed its action. Towers then sought fees pursuant to sections
57.105 and
713.31(1), Florida Statutes (1989)....
...Inn, Inc. v. *918 Friedman,
545 So.2d 417 (Fla.3d DCA 1989). Section
57.105 authorizes an award of reasonable attorney's fees where the court finds a complete absence of justiciable issue of either law or fact raised by the complaint or the defense. Section
713.31 permits "any ......
...o Towers pursuant to both sections. We find attorney's fees were authorized under section
57.105. Absent the Polo Club's spurious evidence, no justiciable issue was either pleaded or argued. We do not agree that fees were also authorized pursuant to section
713.31....
CopyCited 1 times | Published | Florida 5th District Court of Appeal | 2007 WL 1852120
...inal judgment on Langley's lien count. The *1152 trial court's award of attorney's fees and costs must also be reversed. REVERSED and REMANDED. MONACO, J., and ORFINGER, M., Senior Judge, concur. NOTES [1] §§
713.05,
713.08, Fla. Stat. (2004). [2] §
713.31, Fla....
CopyCited 1 times | Published | Florida 3rd District Court of Appeal | 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 8987, 2000 WL 986421
...er part I of chapter 713. The contractor also asserted a claim for attorney’s fees under the contract, but it turns out that the contract had no attorney’s fee provision. In their counterclaim, the owners pled a claim for attorney’s fees under section 713.31, Florida Statutes, the statute applicable to a fraudulent or excessive lien....
...ty is.” The trial court took the testimony of the chairman of the arbitration panel, who said the issue of attorney’s fees arose in the context of chapter 713. While the chairman could not recall whether the discussion involved section
713.29 or section
713.31, the conclusion is inescapable that the discussion involved section
713.29. That is so because only section
713.29 provides for prevailing party attorney’s fees. Section
713.31 does not—and the owners withdrew their claim under section
713.31 during the arbitration in any event....
CopyCited 1 times | Published | Florida 4th District Court of Appeal | 2003 WL 289499
...Legault v. Suncoast Lawn Serv., Inc.,
486 So.2d 72 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986). We find no error in the trial court's conclusion that the above items were not lienable, or the finding that the lien was fraudulent. Whether this was willful exaggeration under section
713.31(2)(a) was an issue of fact....
...As the trial court noted, these items were not lienable "by any stretch of the imagination." Stevens v. Site Developers, Inc.,
584 So.2d 1064 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991). The Levins contend that the trial court was required as a matter of law to award them punitive damages after finding the lien to be fraudulent, relying on section
713.31(2)(c) which states that a "lienor who files a fraudulent lien shall be liable to the owner or the defrauded party in damages, which shall include ......
CopyCited 1 times | Published | United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida | 17 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. B 102, 2003 Bankr. LEXIS 1927
...The Owner-Defendants also argue that the Debtor willfully exaggerated its claim of lien by failing to give proper credit for incomplete work and by including delay charges. The Owner-Defendants seek a determination that the lien is unenforceable and statutory damages. Fraudulent liens are governed by Section 713.31 Florida Statutes....
...To prevail under the statute, defendants have the burden of persuasion to establish that the lienor has: 1) willfully exaggerated the amount of the lien; 2) willfully included a claim for work not performed or materials not furnished, or; 3) compiled the lien with willful and gross negligence as to amount. Fl.St. § 713.31(2)(a)....
CopyPublished | District Court of Appeal of Florida | 1981 Fla. App. LEXIS 21148
PER CURIAM. This is an appeal from a final judgment finding against appellant on its action to foreclose a mechanic’s lien. The. trial court denied the claim based upon the provisions of Section 713.31(2), Florida Statutes (1973) which bar the enforcement of fraudulent or willfully exaggerated claims of lien....
CopyPublished | Florida 5th District Court of Appeal | 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 14665, 2011 WL 4102290
...The issues we must resolve are whether: 1) the trial court erred in concluding that because UBuildlt had a good faith belief that it was owed a certain amount under its contract with Appellants, a finding that the lien filed by UBuildlt was fraudulent under section 713.31, Florida Statutes (2008), was necessarily precluded; 1 2) the trial court erred in concluding that Anderson did not commit slander of title; and 3) Appellants are a prevailing party for purposes of awarding attorney’s fees and costs....
...We agree with Appellants that a trial court is permitted to conclude that a lien was fraudulently filed where the lien is based on services that cannot support a lien under chapter 713, even if the lienor had a good faith belief that it was owed money by the property owner. Section 713.31(2) provides, in relevant part: (a) Any lien asserted under this part in which the lienor has willfully exaggerated the amount for which such lien is claimed or in which the lienor has willfully included a claim for work not performed u...
...se valid lien. (Emphasis added). The trial court’s error in interpreting this provision can be gleaned from the following sentence in the Final Judgment: “If there is a minor mistake or a good faith dispute as to the amount owed ... the statute [section 713.31] precludes the finding of a fraudulent lien.” (Emphasis added). Section 713.31(2)(b) provides, instead, that neither a good faith dispute as to the amount owed nor a minor mistake is sufficient to support a finding that a lien is fraudulent....
...Appellants correctly assert that a trial court can conclude that a lien was willfully exaggerated where the lienor included claims *376 that were not lienable, notwithstanding the lienor’s good faith belief that he or she is entitled to payment. Accordingly, the trial court misinterpreted section 713.31 when it determined that it could not address Appellants’ arguments that UBuildlt’s lien was willfully exaggerated given that UBuildlt included claims that were not lienable....
CopyPublished | Florida 4th District Court of Appeal | 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 14436, 2005 WL 2219080
KLEIN, J. Appellant, a general contractor, appeals a judgment awarding damages to a homeowner based on a summary judgment determining that the contractor filed a fraudulent mechanics’ lien. See § 713.31(2)(a), Fla....
...The trial court also directed a verdict on the contractor’s claim for breach of contract because of inadequate proof of damages; however, we find evidence from which a jury could have properly determined damages. In addition, the trial court misinterpreted section 713.31, Florida Statutes (2001), when it awarded punitive damages. The court concluded that it was required to award the difference between the amount claimed in the lien and the amount actually due. Section 713.31(2)(c) merely provides that the punitive damages cannot exceed that amount....
CopyPublished | District Court of Appeal of Florida | 13 Fla. L. Weekly 2065, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 3880, 1988 WL 89737
...ppellee had breached said contract by virtue of numerous specifically enumerated acts or omissions. She then sought damages for breach of contract, and in a second count, sought damages from appellee for filing a fraudulent claim of lien pursuant to section 713.31, Florida Statutes....
CopyPublished | Florida 4th District Court of Appeal | 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 13188, 1999 WL 791535
...Barnett Bank,
377 So.2d 1150 (Fla.1979); Nico Indus., Inc. v. Steel Form Contractors, Inc.,
625 So.2d 1252 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993), review denied,
637 So.2d 237 (Fla.1994); Marshall Constr., Ltd. v. Coastal Sheet Metal & Roofing, Inc.,
569 So.2d 845 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990); §
713.31(2)(b), Fla....
CopyPublished | Florida 3rd District Court of Appeal
... The arbitration concluded and on March 25, 2024, the arbitrator
entered an interim award, determining that: 1) neither party prevailed on its
respective breach of contract claims; 2) Petitioner’s claim of lien was deemed
fraudulent under section 713.31(2)(a), Florida Statutes (2022), 1 and
unenforceable; and 3) neither party was entitled to an award of monetary
damages....
...I think new recoverable
damages could be incurred if it is not removed immediately
after being notified it is deemed fraudulent.
Please confirm that this will be done by the end of the week or
let me know why it wouldn’t be. (emphasis added).
1
Section 713.31(2)(a), Florida Statutes (2022), provides in pertinent part:
Any lien asserted under this part in which the lienor ....
CopyPublished | Florida 3rd District Court of Appeal
...pacities,
counts for fraud in the inducement, conversion, FDUTPA violation, unjust
enrichment, and fraud. 5 In its complaint, Aquastar alleged that Avant had
4
While Aquastar’s fraudulent lien count asserted a claim for punitive
damages, see §
713.31(2)(c) (2018), Aquastar did not comply with the
procedural requirements of section
768.72 of the Florida Statutes.
5
In the Amended Final Judgment, the trial court ruled against Aquastar on
its claims for fraud in the inducement, conversio...
...8 The trial court determined that the parties’ contract
was a cost-plus contract. Additionally, based on Kaufman’s testimony, the
trial court found that Avant not only breached the contract but acted in a
fraudulent manner; that Avant’s $66,909.21 construction lien was fraudulent
under section 713.31;9 and that Avant’s refusal to provide Aquastar with
information about vendor costs was itself a deceptive practice prohibited by
FDUTPA....
...terclaim, Aquastar
asserted the lien was fraudulent. Making extensive findings of fact – findings
supported primarily by the testimony of Aquastar’s expert – the trial court
20
determined that, under section 713.31 of the Florida Statutes, 16 Avant’s
construction lien was fraudulent: “The Court finds that based on these
overcharges, the lien is either willfully exaggerated or at the very least,
compiled with such willful or gross negligenc...
...ty upon
which he or she seeks to impress such lien or in which the lienor
has compiled his or her claim with such willful and gross
negligence as to amount to a willful exaggeration shall be
deemed a fraudulent lien.
§ 713.31(2)(a), Fla. Stat. (2018).
21
Aquastar. Avant argues that a good faith contract dispute does not convert
a lien arising from non-payment under the contract into a fraudulent lien
under section 713.31(2) and relies heavily upon Vinci Development Co....
...2d DCA 1987) (“A subsequent dispute
between the parties as to the amount of compensation due according to the
contract plan of compensation or even a dispute as to the method of
compensation provided in the contract does not convert such a good faith
dispute into a fraudulent lien as provided in section 713.31.”).
While Avant correctly identifies the general legal proposition
underpinning Vinci Development, a careful reading of Vinci Development
reveals that its holding is inapplicable in this case....
...Post-appeal, Aquastar filed a motion requesting the trial court to
enter an order discharging the lien, but the trial court declined to adjudicate
the motion because of its belief that the pendency of this appeal deprived it
of jurisdiction to entertain the motion.
Upon a finding that a lien is fraudulent, section 713.31(2)(b) empowers
the trial court to declare the lien unenforceable....
...among other things, that (i) the trial court revisit its determinations that the
individual defendants were not liable for the claims asserted in Aquastar’s
counterclaim, and (ii) consistent with the trial court’s fraudulent lien
determination, the trial court award Aquastar section 713.31(2)(c) prevailing
party attorney’s fees, costs and punitive damages....
...section II.F., supra), and denying Aquastar’s claim for punitive damages.
With regard to that portion of Aquastar’s rehearing motion arguing that
the trial court erred by not awarding it reasonable attorney’s fees and costs
pursuant to section
713.31(2)(c), to the extent that Aquastar seeks recovery
of such fees that would not be duplicative of fees the trial court may award
pursuant to section
713.29 (see section II.G.2., supra), on remand the trial
court shall conduct whatever proceedings it deems necessary to determine
whether, in light of the holdings contained in this opinion, Aquastar is the
prevailing party on the significant issues in the case, and thus entitled to
reasonable attorney’s fees and costs pursuant to section
713.31(2)(c)....
...those reasonable attorney’s fees to which Aquastar is entitled under section
713.29; and (iii) to determine, in light of the holdings in this opinion, whether
Aquastar is the substantially prevailing party entitled to reasonable fees and
costs pursuant to section
713.31(2)(c), to the extent that these fees are not
duplicative of section
713.29 fees.
We reverse the Amended Final Judgment to the extent that it
concluded that Avant committed a FDUTPA violation....
CopyPublished | Florida 2nd District Court of Appeal
including a fraudulent lien defense based on section
713.31(2)(a)–(b), Florida Statutes (2020). Mr. Neilen
CopyPublished | Florida 3rd District Court of Appeal
...he president of PAI, filed
a fraudulent lien. The trial court’s order declared PAI’s lien on the condominium
unenforceable, discharged the lien, and determined that Lubercy is entitled to
prevailing party fees and punitive damages pursuant to section 713.31(2)(c),
Florida Statutes....
...If all claims arise from the same set of facts, an order resolving
fewer than all of the counts is not appealable”) (citations and footnote omitted).
On appeal, Perlberg also contests the trial court’s determination that Lubercy
is entitled to prevailing party fees pursuant to section 713.31(2)(c), but that
determination is not appealable because the amount of fees has not yet been fixed.
Threadgill v....
CopyPublished | Florida 2nd District Court of Appeal | 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 2691, 2010 WL 743937
...The Goodmans filed suit in the circuit court in Collier County against Custom Carpentry and Tansey, individually. Count I was directed against Custom Carpentry and sought an order of the trial court vacating and canceling the lien. Count II was directed against Custom Carpentry and sought punitive damages pursuant to section 713.31, Florida Statutes (2005), for the filing of a fraudulent lien....
...nsation, but it was less than the amount he was seeking. As to the claim of lien recorded in April 2005, and the amended claim of lien recorded in February 2006 by Custom Carpentry, the trial court found that both liens were fraudulent as defined by section 713.31, Florida Statutes....
CopyPublished | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 1988 WL 134442
...Eventually O'Kon filed a mechanic's lien on April 23, 1987, for its services on *837 the real property in Leon County. In reaction to the filing of the mechanic's lien by O'Kon, appellees brought suit alleging (1) slander of title, and (2) breach of a statutetort, alleging that appellant's lien was fraudulent as provided in section 713.31, Florida Statutes....
CopyPublished | Florida 5th District Court of Appeal | 2007 Fla. App. LEXIS 4306, 2007 WL 858418
...The Kifners tendered $26,250.00 to Landing Group as payment for the construction services rendered. Landing Group rejected this proposed settlement. In 2004, the Kifners filed a complaint against Landing Group, in which they brought an action “pursuant to Section [713.31], Florida Statutes, to discharge a willfully exaggerated and fraudulent Claim of Lien and for damages, including punitive damages, court costs, clerk fees and attorney’s fees.” In response, Landing Group filed a counterclaim containing seven counts....
CopyPublished | District Court of Appeal of Florida | 1976 Fla. App. LEXIS 13991
DOWNEY, Judge. We have fully considered the appellate points raised and conclude that they are without merit. Appellant contends that the lien involved herein is a fraudulent lien as provided in § 713.31(2) (b), F.S.1973....
CopyPublished | District Court of Appeal of Florida | 1987 WL 422
...Intercontinental Group, Inc.,
374 So.2d 21 (Fla.3d DCA 1979); Jaquin-Florida Distilling Company v. Reynolds, Smith and Hills, Architects-Engineers-Planners, Incorporated,
319 So.2d 604 (Fla.1st DCA 1975); Palmer v. Thomas,
284 So.2d 709 (Fla.lst DCA 1973); Sections
713.06(2)(a) and
713.31(2)(c) Florida Statutes (1981); Section 1.260(c) Florida Rules Civil Procedure.
CopyPublished | Florida 4th District Court of Appeal
...ction company.
The contractor filed a complaint against the homeowners asking them
to show cause why they filed the lien and asserting the lien should not be
enforced or it should be vacated. Count II claimed the lien was fraudulent
and violated section 713.31(2)(a), Florida Statutes.
When the homeowners failed to answer the complaint within the
requisite time, the contractor moved for a default, which was entered the
same day....
...2d 363, 364 (Fla.
4th DCA 2007) (citing Art. X, § 4, Fla. Const.).
As conceded by the homeowners, none of these exceptions are present.
They even acknowledge that their filing of the lien was erroneous. But,
they suggest they can provide the meritorious defense that pursuant to
section 713.31(2)(b), Florida Statutes (2020), “a minor mistake or error in
a claim of lien . . . does not constitute a willful exaggeration that operates
to defeat an otherwise valid lien.” Id.
As the contractor points out, section 713.31(2)(b) pertains to situations
when there is an otherwise valid lien....
CopyPublished | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 1973 Fla. App. LEXIS 7789
affirmed upon the authority of Florida Statutes, §
713.31(2), F.S.A. Affirmed. CARROLL, DONALD K., Acting
CopyPublished | District Court of Appeal of Florida | 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 7831, 1996 WL 412806
...However, the trial court found that Wal-mart had perpetrated a constructive fraud on the subcontractors by negligently failing to determine the invalidity of the payment bond, and held that the subcontractors were entitled to equitable relief under section 713.31, Florida Statutes. Wal-Mart argues on appeal that such equitable relief under section 713.31 requires evidence of actual fraud, intentional misrepresentation, or affirmative deception; the subcontractors argue to the contrary that equitable relief under section 713.31 is appropriate absent any such proof. Section 713.31(1), Florida Statutes (1993), provides in pertinent part that a trial court may provide equitable remedies “[w]hen the owner or any lienor shall, by fraud, or collusion, deprive or attempt to deprive any lienor of benefits or rights t...
...iff.” (Emphasis added.) See also Taylor v. Kenco Chemical & Mfg. Corp.,
465 So.2d 581, 589 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985) (listing elements of fraud). In Vinci Dev. Co. v. Connell,
509 So.2d 1128, 1132 (Fla. 2d DCA), 2 the court held that Florida Statute section
713.31, providing remedies for fraudulent liens, was intended to apply where a lienor willfully exaggerates the claim of lien, not where the filing, though incorrect, is made in “good faith.” We hold that the trial court erred in entering summary final judgment for the subcontractors under section
713.31(1) in the absence of a finding of intent to defraud....
CopyPublished | Florida 3rd District Court of Appeal | 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 2272, 2006 WL 399517
...The record supports the trial court’s determination that the contractor had not substantially performed the contract. The trial court correctly resolved the issues of breach of contract, account stated, and quantum meruit. With regard to the claim for fraudulent lien under section 713.31, Florida Statutes, there has in recent years been a statutory amendment stating, “However, a minor mistake or error in a claim of lien, or a good faith dispute as to the amount due does not constitute a willful exaggeration that operates to defeat an otherwise valid lien.” Id. § 713.31(2)(b)....
...der section
713.29, Florida Statutes. The parties' contract did not contain an attorney's fee provision. The owners asserted a counterclaim for fraudulent lien, which does carry a right to attorney’s fees if the lien is found to be fraudulent. See §
713.31(2)(c), Fla....
CopyPublished | Florida 5th District Court of Appeal | 1996 WL 714018
...Prosperi v. Code, Inc.,
626 So.2d 1360, 1362 (Fla.1993). As the court noted in Prosperi, the purpose of the mechanic's lien law is "to afford the laborer or materialman adequate assurance of being fully compensated for his labor or services." Id. at 1362. Section
713.31(2)(a) requires a willful exaggeration of the lien before a lien may be deemed fraudulent....
CopyPublished | Florida 5th District Court of Appeal | 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 1467, 2000 WL 193059
...ufficient pleadings before the court on which to base a decision. Santiago apparently failed to follow up on the court’s offer to permit an amendment to the pleadings. In any event, however, we do not agree that Santiago has waived her right under section 713.31, Fla....
CopyPublished | District Court of Appeal of Florida | 1980 Fla. App. LEXIS 15545
...inst Appel-lee, Waterway Homes, Inc., pursuant to Chapter 713, Florida Statutes (1977). After the complaint was tried, the trial judge entered a final judgment for fees and costs in favor of Appellee. A jury trial of Appel-lee’s Counterclaim under section 713.31, Florida Statutes (1977), resulted in a judgment for Appellee....
...The court overruled the objection and read into evidence only the order and judgment portion of the final judgment. Appellant contends that this *717 was highly prejudicial because the jury was told, in effect, that Appellant had no lien and therefore could only conclude that the lien was fraudulent. Section 713.31(2)(c), Florida Statutes (1977), provides that a punitive damage award shall not exceed the difference between the amount claimed by the lienor and the amount actually due or to become due....
...ed, but Appellant suggested none to the court. His objection on the grounds of relevancy was properly overruled. See Caldwell v. People’s Bank,
73 Fla. 1165 ,
75 So. 848 (1917). AFFIRMED. COBB, J., and MILLER, ROBERT P., Associate Judge, concur. . §
713.31(2)(c), Fla.Stat....
CopyPublished | Florida 5th District Court of Appeal | 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 18225
...as to the one cause of action to which no answer was filed, failed to conclusively negate
every defense that might have been presented in the answer, we reverse.
Appellee filed suit, alleging the following three causes of action: (1) fraud based
upon violations of section 713.31(2), Florida Statutes (2009); (2) slander of title; and (3)
abuse of process....
CopyPublished | District Court of Appeal of Florida | 1975 Fla. App. LEXIS 18863
amount to willful exaggeration. See Fla.Stat. § 713.-31, F.S.A. *4The trial court, after examination and
CopyPublished | Supreme Court of Florida | 2016 WL 4480340
chapter 713 is subject to the fraud provisions of §
713.31, Fla. Stat., and not §
817.535(6), Fla, Stat.
CopyPublished | District Court of Appeal of Florida
attorney’s fees and costs to Marocco pursuant to section
713.31, Florida Statutes; and (7) the trial court
CopyPublished | District Court of Appeal of Florida
claimed the lien was fraudulent and violated section
713.31(2)(a), Florida Statutes. When the homeowners
CopyPublished | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 1997 WL 144084
...wed Ewell with regard to investigation of the payment bond. The court did not find, and there was no evidence to support a finding of, intentional misrepresentation or fraud. This court recently held that there could be no equitable lien pursuant to section 713.31, Fla.Stat., [2] absent a finding of intent to defraud....
...light of the discussion above, the final judgment imposing an equitable lien is REVERSED. JOANOS, WOLF and VAN NORTWICK, JJ., concur. NOTES [1] We affirm as to Ewell's cross-appeal on attorney's fees. [2] Appellee sought to impose a lien pursuant to section 713.31, Fla.Stat., which provides in pertinent part: Remedies in case of fraud or collusion. (1) When the owner or any lienor shall, by fraud or collusion, deprive or attempt to deprive any lienor of benefits or rights to which such lienor...
