Hidden Traps and Treasures in Florida’s Lien Law.

Introduction
Like any other statutorily driven area of the law, Florida’s lien law poses some serious risks to those who are unaware of its intricacies. Indeed, some may not fully appreciate the nuances of this law and can easily find themselves without the remedy they believed was a sure thing. On the flip-side, one who is cognizant of the ins-and-outs of Fla. Stat. § 713 can secure his or her work, and even obtain a wind-fall. This article addresses the obvious and not so obvious elements of Florida’s lien law with the thought that a better understanding of this sometimes complex area will help practitioners avoid the deadly traps from which there may be no rescue.

Substantial Compliance with §713
Importantly, if a lienor has substantially complied with the Notice to Owner and Claim of Lien requirements, some errors or omissions will not prevent the enforcement of a claim against a person who has not been adversely affected by such omission or error.^{^[1]} The technical fulfillment of all statutory components for a claim, although desirable, is neither required nor can it form the basis for denial of the enforcement of an otherwise valid lien.^{^[2]} Such liens are valid unless in the discretion of a trial court some prejudice is shown to the owner or another party.^{^[3]}

The significance of this is quite obvious for both the lienor and the owner. From the lienor’s perspective, a slight error or omission should not invalidate its otherwise valid lien. A lienor, however, should not serve its Notice to Owner or record and serve its Claim of Lien with the intention of relying on the equity of a court to overlook an error; this would be a gamble with dire consequences.

Similarly, an owner should not expect that a technical oversight on the part of a lienor will always result in an invalid lien. This is especially true if the owner was aware of the error early on and chose to do nothing about it. While there are many cases which have invalidated liens for technical omissions, it is very possible that a court sitting in equity may find that the lien, overall, substantially complies with the lien law.

Specially Fabricated Materials
“Specially fabricated materials” are materials which, by their nature, are not generally suited for, or readily adaptable to, use in a similar improvement. An example of a specially fabricated material is a roof truss for a uniquely designed roof. Once the wood is cut for that truss, it can not be readily adaptable for use in another type of truss or roof.

A Notice to Owner must be served within 45 days from the commencement of construction of those specially manufactured goods, either on or off site.^{^[4]} In contrast, a Notice to Owner for all other types of construction materials must be served 45 days from the date of first delivery of said materials to the job site. Most importantly, actual delivery of the specially fabricated materials to the job site is not required.^{^[5]}

A court may disagree with the lienor’s classification that certain goods are in fact “specially fabricated.” As such, a lienor should always comply with the earlier of the notice requirements, be it as a fabricator of speciality materials or as a supplier of standard construction materials.

Laborers vs. Labor Pools
A “laborer” is any person other than an architect, landscape architect, engineer, surveyor and mapper, and the like who, under properly authorized contract, personally performs on the site of the improvement labor or services which benefit the real property; he is not one who furnishes materials or labor service of others.^{^[6]}

A laborer is generally extended the greatest protection under the lien law while having to comply with the least amount of statutory prerequisites to enforce a lien. As an example, a laborer need not serve a notice to owner to perfect his or her lien^{^[7]}. The rationale for exempting laborers from certain notice requirements is that an individual laborer will not work long without pay and consequently will not have a large hidden claim.^{^[8]}

A labor pool, however, is not a laborer. An employer, on behalf of its employees, can not file and foreclose a mechanic's lien as a “laborer,” where the employer provides the labor services of individuals with whom it contracts.^{^[9]} Florida law clearly distinguishes between those who personally perform work and those who merely furnish persons to do the work.^{^[10]} A business entity does not come within the general classes included in the definition of laborer.^{^[11]}

For all practical purposes, a labor pool is a subcontractor or a sub-subcontractor and as such must comply with all of the notice requirements of that class of lienor.

Requests for Information
A lack of privity between parties to a construction project often results in a lack of information. This is easily overcome by requesting the needed information pursuant to Fla. Stat. § 713.16.

The owner may serve in writing a demand to the lienor for a written statement under oath of his or her account.^{^[12]} The Statement of Account will include, if requested, the nature of the labor or services performed and to be performed, if any, the materials furnished, the materials to be furnished, if known, the amount paid on account to date, the amount due, and the amount to become due, if known.^{^[13]} The failure or refusal to furnish the Statement within 30 days after the demand or the furnishing of a false or fraudulent statement will deprive the lienor of his or her lien.^{^[14]}

The demand must be served on the lienor at the address and to the attention of any person who is designated in the notice to owner.^{^[15]} If the demand is not served upon the designated persons and at the address as set forth in the notice to owner, then the failure or refusal to furnish the statement will deprive the lienor of his or her lien.^{^[16]}

The demand must prominently display the following (or similar) warning: WARNING: YOUR FAILURE TO FURNISH THE REQUESTED STATEMENT, SIGNED UNDER OATH, WITHIN 30 DAYS OR THE FURNISHING OF A FALSE STATEMENT WILL RESULT IN THE LOSS OF YOUR LIEN.^{^[17]}

The failure to notarize an otherwise accurate and timely Statement of Account is fatal to a mechanics' lien claim.^{^[18]} This is in light of the strict compliance required within the mechanics' lien statutes, even in absence of any showing of prejudice to the owner.^{^[19]}

This method of gathering information should not be reserved for pre-litigation. It is a very useful tool during litigation to obtain specific information very quickly. In addition, such a request will usually prompt the opposition to more closely review their position, understanding they may lose their lien right if they fail to file a timely or accurate response. Unfortunately (or fortunately), however, the failure to furnish a response to a demand for Statement of Account will not affect the validity of a claim of lien being enforced through a foreclosure case which was filed prior to the date the demand for the statement is received by the lienor.^{^[20]}

Privity and non-privity lienors are also afforded a means to obtain information from the owner. Any lienor who has filed a claim of lien may make a written demand on the owner for a written statement under oath.^{^[21]} The statement, if so requested, shall show the amount of all direct contracts, the amount paid by or on behalf of the owner for all labor, services, and materials furnished pursuant to the direct contracts, the dates and amounts paid or to be paid by or on behalf of the owner for all improvements described in any direct contracts, and the reasonable estimated costs of completing any direct contract under which construction has ceased.^{^[22]} If known, the actual cost of completion must be provided by the owner in the statement.^{^[23]}

The written demand must include the following warning in conspicuous type in substantially the following form: WARNING: YOUR FAILURE TO FURNISH THE REQUESTED STATEMENT WITHIN 30 DAYS OR THE FURNISHING OF A FALSE STATEMENT WILL RESULT IN THE LOSS OF YOUR RIGHT TO RECOVER ATTORNEY FEES IN ANY ACTION TO ENFORCE THE CLAIM OF LIEN OF THE PERSON REQUESTING THIS STATEMENT.^{^[24]}

An owner who does not provide the statement within 30 days after the demand, or who provides a false or fraudulent statement, will not be the prevailing party for purposes of an award of attorney's fees under Fla. Stat. § 713.29.^{^[25]}

Request for List of Subcontractors
An owner may request from the contractor a list of all subcontractors and suppliers who have any contract with the contractor to furnish any material or to perform any service for the contractor with respect to the owner’s property.^{^[26]} The request must be in writing and delivered by registered or certified mail to the address of the contractor shown in the contract or on the recorded notice of commencement.^{^[27]}

The contractor must then, within 10 days after receipt, furnish to the property owner or the property owner's agent a list of the subcontractors and suppliers who have a contract with the contractor as of the date or receipt of the request.^{^[28]} If the contractor fails to furnish the list, the contractor forfeits the contractor's right to assert a lien against the owner's property to the extent the owner is prejudiced by the contractor's failure to furnish the list or by any omissions from the list.^{^[29]}

Notice to Owner/Contractor from a Sub-subcontractor
A sub-subcontractor, a materialman to a subcontractor, and a materialman to a sub-subcontractor must serve a copy of the Notice to Owner on the contractor as a prerequisite to perfecting a lien and recording a Claim of Lien.^{^[30]} If the materialman to a sub-subcontractor knows the name and address of the subcontractor, it must also serve a copy of the Notice to Owner on the subcontractor as well.^{^[31]}

The failure of a sub-subcontractor , a materialman to a subcontractor, or a materialman to a sub-subcontractor, to serve a copy of the Notice to Owner on the contractor, bars a potential lienor’s claim.^{^[32]} However, an owner’s failure to record a Notice of Commencement may obviate the need for a sub-subcontractor, a materialman to a subcontractor, or a materialman to a sub-subcontractor to serve the contractor with such a Notice to Owner.^{^[33]}

Like other sections of the lien law, the owner is only entitled to the benefit of the law if the owner complies with its requirements. An otherwise invalid lien can become “valid” if the owner fails to satisfy its obligations.

Notice to Owner Served Before Final Payment
The notice to owner must be served before commencing work but not later than 45 days after commencing work.^{^[34]} However, it must always be served before the date of the owner’s disbursement of the final payment after the contractor has furnished the Contractor’s Final Affidavit.^{^[35]}

While this is typically a rare event, it may be of importance to those lienors who appear very late on the job or for jobs of very short duration.

Amending a Claim of Lien
Any recorded claim of lien may be amended at any time during the original period allowed for recording the claim of lien,^{^[36]} as long as the amendment shall not cause any person to suffer any detriment by having relied upon the original Claim of Lien.^{^[37]} Any amendment of the Claim of Lien shall be recorded in the same manner as provided for the recording of the original Claim of Lien.^{^[38]} Amending a defective Claim of Lien may not render it enforceable.^{^[39]}

More often then not, you will only have one opportunity to record and serve a Claim of Lien (which is too often filed quickly on the 89th or 90th day). Errors or omissions are permanent and remain with you throughout the litigation.

Affidavit of Intention to Recommence and Notice of A Re-Commencement
There is typically much confusion during the termination of or abandonment by a contractor on a job site. A lawyer’s concern is usually directed at the contract issues surrounding the termination of the old and the engagement of a new contractor. However, the service and recording of the necessary documents are also of paramount importance.

If construction ceases before completion of the project and the owner desires to recommence construction, he or she may pay all lienors in full or pro rata^{^[40]} prior to recommencement.^{^[41]} If this occurs, all liens for the recommenced construction shall take a priority position.^{^[42]}

Alternatively, the owner may record^{^[43]} an affidavit in the clerk’s office stating his or her intention to recommence construction.^{^[44]} The affidavit must state that all lienors who have served a Notice to Owner have been paid in full.^{^[45]} The owner must then list any and all unpaid lienors in the affidavit.^{^[46]} Thirty days after recording the affidavit, the rights of any person acquiring any interest, lien or encumbrance on the property (including any lienor on the recommenced construction) will be superior to any lien on the prior construction.^{^[47]} This will be the case unless a prior lienor records a Claim of Lien within the thirty day period.^{^[48]} However, before recommencing construction, the owner must also record and post a new Notice of Commencement^{^[49]} for the recommenced construction project,.^{^[50]}

The effect of an owner's failure to record and serve an affidavit of intention to recommence construction and a new Notice of Commencement is threefold. First, the owner loses his right to set off costs of completing the project from the amount of the initial contract price.^{^[51]} Second, the owner is unable to defeat claims of lienors arising from the original construction based on a “proper payments” defense.^{^[52]} And third, where the owner's affidavit is not recorded, the thirty day shortened time for filing a Claim of Lien does not apply.^{^[53]}

The effect on the attorney is more severe. An attorney hired to assist in the termination of a general contractor has an obligation to his or her clients to insure that the affidavit of intention to recommence construction and a new Notice of Commencement are filed.^{^[54]} At a minimum, the attorney must specifically advise his or her client of the necessity of these actions.^{^[55]} An attorney's failure to see that these requirements of the mechanics' lien law are complied with may result in a claim of malpractice.^{^[56]}

Notice of Contest of Lien
An owner may occasionally benefit from shortening the time in which a lienor may file suit to foreclose its lien. One way to accomplish this is to serve a Notice of Contest of Lien.^{^[57]} Specifically, the lien of any lienor upon whom such notice is served shall be extinguished automatically unless the lienor institutes a suit to enforce his or her lien within 60 days shall be extinguished automatically.^{^[58]} The clerk shall mail a copy of the Notice of Contest to the lien claimant at the address shown in the Claim of Lien.^{^[59]} Service shall be deemed complete upon mailing.^{^[60]} The Notice of Contest acts by operation of law to discharge a lien on 60th day without any intervention of the court.^{^[61]} Moreover, the filing of a Notice of Contest of Lien should not violate an automatic stay imposed by the Bankruptcy Code.^{^[62]}

20 Day Summons to Show Cause
A more drastic method for shortening the limitation period of a Claim of Lien is to file a complaint against the lienor demanding that the lienor show cause why the lien in question should not be vacated.^{^[63]} Upon the failure of the lienor to show cause why the lien should not be enforced or the lienor's failure to commence such action before the return date of the summons, the court shall immediately order cancellation of the lien.^{^[64]}

A lienor's motion for extension of time to respond to the property owners' motion for discharge of lien does not constitute "good cause" as required by the mechanic's lien statute for tolling of the statutory 20-day period.^{^[65]} Strict compliance with statutory provisions is required in order to protect a lien.^{^[66]} The court has no discretion to extend the 20-day period, even if the lienor requests additional time to obtain counsel.^{^[67]}

Criminal Penalties
It is a felony for a person, firm, or corporation, or an agent, officer, or employee thereof, who receives any payment on account of improving real property to not apply such portion of any payment to the payment of all amounts then due and owing for services and labor which were performed on, or materials which were furnished for, such improvement prior to receipt of the payment.^{^[68]} This does not, however, prevent any person from withholding any payment, or any part of a payment, in accordance with the terms of a contract or pursuant to a bona fide dispute regarding the amount due.^{^[69]} There is no private right of action for the misappropriation of construction funds.^{^[70]}

Extraordinary Relief for the Payment of Undisputed Sums
Most construction claims are made up of sums that are in dispute and sums which are undisputed. More often then not, the party holding the undisputed sum is holding it for no other reason then to exert leverage. Under Fla. Stat. § 713.346^{^[71]}, this need not be tolerated.

Any person who receives a payment for constructing or altering a permanent improvement to real property must pay, in accordance with the contract terms, the undisputed contract obligation.^{^[72]} The failure to pay the undisputed obligation within 30 days after the date the labor, services, or materials are furnished, and payment for same became due, shall entitle any person providing such labor, services, or materials to certain extraordinary procedures and remedies.^{^[73]}

The complainant must first file and serve a verified complaint alleging: the existence of a contract to improve real property, a description of the labor, services, or materials provided and allege that the labor, services, or materials were provided in accordance with the contract, the amount of the contract price, the amount, if any, paid pursuant to the contract, the amount that remains unpaid pursuant to the contract, the amount thereof that is undisputed, that the undisputed amount has remained due and payable pursuant to the contract for more than 30 days after the date the labor or services were accepted or the materials were received, and that the person against whom the complaint was filed has received payment on account of the labor, services, or materials described in the complaint more than 30 days prior to the date the complaint was filed.^{^[74]}

After service of the complaint, the court will conduct an evidentiary hearing on the complaint, upon not less than 15 days' written notice.^{^[75]} The complainant is entitled to the following remedies up to the undisputed amount and upon proof of each allegation in the complaint: an accounting of the use of any such payment from the person who received such payment, a temporary injunction against the person who received the payment, subject to the bond requirements specified in the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure, prejudgment attachment against the person who received the payment, in accordance with each of the requirements of Chapter 76, and such other legal or equitable remedies as may be appropriate in accordance with the requirements of the law.^{^[76]}

The remedies above must be granted without regard to any other remedy at law and without regard to whether or not irreparable damage has occurred or will occur.^{^[77]} The remedies, however, do not apply to the extent a bona fide dispute exists regarding any portion of the contract price or in the event the complainant has committed a material breach of the contract.^{^[78]} The prevailing party in any proceeding under this section is entitled to recover costs, including a reasonable attorney's fee, at trial and on appeal.^{^[79]}

Single Claims of Lien
For every separate contract between the owner and the contractor, there should be a separate Notice of Commencement. While this may not always be the case, a lienor is advised to file separate claims of lien for work done under separate contracts.

As an example, a contractor was required to file two claims of lien against property for construction and then for subsequent repair work done on the property, even though work was done on the same structure but the construction and repairs were done under two separate contracts.^{^[80]} The determination of whether a lien would attach to one or more buildings depended on whether labor was performed or materials were furnished under a single contract embracing several buildings or under separate contracts.^{^[81]}

Work on Leased Property
It is of crucial importance to determine if the party contracting for the work is the owner because a lien can only extend to the right, title, and interest of the person who contracts for the improvement.^{^[82]} When an improvement is made by a lessee in accordance with an agreement between such lessee and her or his lessor, the lien shall extend to the interest of the lessor.^{^[83]} However, when the lease expressly provides that the interest of the lessor shall not be subject to liens for improvements made by the lessee, the lessee is under an obligation to notify the contractor of said provision in the lease.^{^[84]}

While the willful failure of the lessee to provide such notice to the contractor shall render the contract between the lessee and the contractor voidable at the option of the contractor^{^[85]}, it is usually too late for the contractor. A contractor almost always learns that the true owner is not the contracting party after some or all of the work is done and payment is not forthcoming.

The law is very unforgiving. As an example, a lessor does not subject his property to a mechanic's lien for work done by a contractor for the lessee merely because he knows the work is taking place and fails to take action to stop it.^{^[86]} In another case, where the parties to a lease contemplated that the lessee would renovate the space, including certain electrical work, the lessor's interest was not subject to a lien by the electrical contractor where the lease did not require such improvements.^{^[87]} The improvements were for the benefit of the lessee and because the lessor did not desire the renovations, as they tended to convert the building from a general use property to a special use property thereby reducing its marketability.^{^[88]}

In order for the contractor to be entitled to a lien on improved realty as against the lessor when work is done for the lessee, the lease must by its terms require the work to be done or by its terms make it obvious that the improvements were the pith of the lease.^{^[89]} Where the terms of the lease contemplated improvements, the lessor's interest is subject to a mechanics' lien unless the lessor records the necessary disclaimer.^{^[90]}

Improvement Defined
"Improve" means build, erect, place, make, alter, remove, repair, or demolish any improvement over, upon, connected with, or beneath the surface of real property, or excavate any land, or furnish materials for any of these purposes, or perform any labor or services upon the improvements, including the furnishing of carpet or rugs or appliances that are permanently affixed to the real property and final construction cleanup to prepare a structure for occupancy; or perform any labor or services or furnish any materials in grading, seeding, sodding, or planting for landscaping purposes, including the furnishing of trees, shrubs, bushes, or plants that are planted on the real property, or in equipping any improvement with fixtures or permanent apparatus or provide any solid-waste collection or disposal on the site of the improvement.^{^[91]}

Some improvements, however, are not lienable. A lienor was not entitled to lien shopping mall property for a kiosk where the trial court found that such structure was not a permanent benefit to the mall.^{^[92]} A maintenance landscaping service consisting of mowing a lawn and cutting shrubbery did not bestow a "permanent benefit" upon the land within the mechanic's lien statute and thus, did not entitle the laborer to a mechanic's lien.^{^[93]} It is not the duty of the court to weigh the relative advantage to the owner of each structure erected on the land to determine whether there has been an improvement of the land sufficient to support a lien.^{^[94]}

Because there is no bright line rule, a lienor is advised to serve a timely Notice to Owner at the outset of any work. Careful consideration can then be given to the validity of any lien that may be recorded and served for the work in question. But be careful, the risk of filing a lien on “non-lienable” work may be a judicial finding that the lien was improper and possibly fraudulent, subjecting the hopeful lienor to attorneys’ fees under Fla. Stat. § 713.29.

Proper and Improper Payments
If an owner fulfills all of its duties under the mechanics' lien law, then its liability for all lien claims will not exceed the contract price.^{^[95]} While an owner is not required to comply with the notice requirements of the lien law, it does so at the risk of paying twice for improvements where the contractor may not have paid certain lienors.^{^[96]}

An owner should not make a final payment unless it has received the Contractor’s Final Affidavit.^{^[97]} A final payment under a building contract, made by the owner to the general contractor without first securing sworn statements from the contractor, was not "properly made".^{^[98]} As a result, the owner becomes responsible to the contractor's unpaid subcontractors and materialmen in the amount of the final payment.^{^[99]}

In addition, the owner must file a Notice of Commencement. A materialman's lien was enforceable against a homeowner where the homeowner, without knowledge of unpaid materials, paid a contractor in full upon completion of the contract and the homeowner had neither filed a Notice of Commencement nor obtained a contractor's affidavit.^{^[100]} This was the case even though the materialman did not serve a Notice to Owner until after the homeowner had paid the contractor in full.^{^[101]}

An owner must pay careful attention if the contractor abandons the project or is terminated. Specifically, the owner must comply with the re-commencement procedures so that all future payments to the new contractor are considered “proper”.^{^[102]} Following the abandonment of a construction contract by a general contractor, liability of the owner to subcontractors may be limited to the contract price remaining after deducting therefrom payments properly made.^{^[103]}

Payments on Account
The misapplication of a partial payment for materials may result in the invalidity of a lien and the onus is on the party receiving the payment to clarify how the payment is to be applied. Specifically, when a payment for materials is made to a subcontractor, sub-subcontractor, or materialman, then the subcontractor, sub-subcontractor, or materialman shall demand from the person making the payment a designation for which account the payment is to apply.^{^[104]}

It is a complete defense (up to the amount of the payment) if the owner can prove: one, that a payment made by the owner to the contractor for materials has been paid over to the subcontractor, sub-subcontractor, or materialman; and two, that when such payment was received by such subcontractor, sub-subcontractor, or materialman, he did not demand a designation of the account to which the payment was to be applied (or if he did note a designation, he failed to apply the payment in accordance therewith).^{^[105]}

Right to Repossess Materials
If for any reason the completion of an improvement is abandoned or though the improvement is completed, materials delivered are not used, a lienor who has delivered materials for the improvement which have not been incorporated and for which he has not been paid may peaceably repossess such materials.^{^[106]} That lienor however, will then no longer have a lien on the real property or improvements and shall have no right against any person for the price of the materials.^{^[107]}

This right to repossess the materials shall not be affected by their sale, encumbrance, attachment, or transfer from the site, except if the materials have been transferred to a bona fide purchaser.^{^[108]} The right of repossession and removal shall extend only to materials whose purchase price does not exceed the amount remaining due to the repossessing lienor.^{^[109]} If the materials have been partly paid for, the person delivering them may repossess the materials as allowed upon refunding the part of the purchase price which has been paid.^{^[110]} The recovery of materials under Fla. Stat. § 713.15 should not be considered a preferential transfer under the Bankruptcy Code and should not be voided.^{^[111]} As well, materials on a construction site which are about to be incorporated into the realty are immune from levy, execution, or attachment by the material supplier’s creditors.^{^[112]} This is true even if the creditor holds a security interest in the payments from the general contractor to the debtor.^{^[113]}

Conclusion
There is no substitute for actually knowing the law in this area. The rights and obligations of an owner, contractor, materialman, sub-contractor and laborer are quite specific and distinct, and all are time sensitive. Miss a deadline and you could literally lose your entire claim. Take the time to research the applicable provisions of Florida’s lien law before you act; this way you’ll be well prepared to locate the traps, and better yet, know where to look for the treasures.

[1]. Fla. Stat. '' 713.06, 713.08

[2]. Mid-State Contractors, Inc. v. Halo Development Corp., 342 So.2d 1078 (Fla. 2d DCA 1977)

[3]. Id.

[4]. Stunkel v. Gazebo Landscaping Design, Inc., 660 So.2d 623 (Fla. 1995)

[5]. Oolite Industries, Inc. v. Millman Const. Co., Inc., 501 So.2d 655 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987)

[6]. Fla. Stat. ' 713.01

[7]. Fla. Stat. ' 713.06(2)(a)

[8]. Morgan v. Goodwin, 355 So.2d 217 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978)

[9]. V L Orlando Bldg. Corp. v. Skilled Services Corp., 769 So.2d 526 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000)

[10]. Fleitas v. Julson, Inc., 580 So.2d 636 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991), rev. denied, 591 So.2d 182 (Fla.1991).

[11]. Id.

[12]. Fla. Stat. '713.16(2)

[13]. Id.

[14]. Id.

[15]. Id.

[16]. Id.

[17]. Fla. Stat. '713.16(3)

[18]. Stresscon v. Madiedo, 581 So.2d 158 (Fla. 1991)

[19]. Stresscon v. Madiedo, 581 So.2d 158 (Fla. 1991); Contra Florida Wood Services, Inc. v. Osprey Links Joint Venture, 720 So.2d 591 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998) (prejudice required)

[20]. Fla. Stat. ' 713.16(2)

[21]. Fla. Stat. ' 713.16(5)

[22]. Id.

[23]. Id.

[24]. Id.

[25]. Id.

[26]. Fla. Stat. ' 713.165

[27]. Id.

[28]. Id.

[29]. Id.

[30]. Fla. Stat. ' 713.06(2)(a)

[31]. Id.

[32]. Hardrives Co. v. Tri-County Concrete Products, Inc., 489 So.2d 1211 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986)

[33]. Roof Structures, Inc. v. Picou, 544 So.2d 1138 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989). See also Suchman v. National Hauling, Inc., 549 So.2d 200 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989)

[34]. Fla. Stat. ' 713.06(2)(a)

[35]. Id.

[36]. Fla. Stat. ' 713.08

[37]. Id.

[38]. Id.

[39]. In re CJW Ltd., Inc., 172 B.R. 675 (Bankr. M.D. Fla.,1994), O'Brian Associates of Orlando, Inc. v. Tully, 184 So.2d 202 (Fla. 4th DCA 1966)

[40]. in accordance with Fla. Stat. ' 713.06(4)

[41]. Fla. Sta. ' 713.07(4)

[42]. Id.

[43]. A copy of the affidavit must also be served on each lienor named in the affidavit.

[44]. Fla. Sta. ' 713.07(4)

[45]. Id.

[46]. Id.

[47]. Id.

[48]. Id.

[49]. as provided in Fla. Stat. ' 713.13

[50]. Fla. Sta. ' 713.07(4)

[51]. McCurry v. Eppolito, 506 So.2d 1110 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987)

[52]. Id.

[53]. Id.

[54]. Id.

[55]. Id.

[56]. Id.

[57]. Fla. Sta. ' 713.22

[58]. Id.

[59]. Id.

[60]. Id.

[61]. Charles Redi-Mix, Inc. v. Phillips, 580 So.2d 166 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991)

[62]. Matter of W. Allen Young & Associates, Inc., 15 B.R. 20 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 1981)

[63]. Fla. Stat. ' 713.21(4)

[64]. Id.

[65]. Sturge v. LCS Development Corp., 643 So.2d 53 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994)

[66]. Id.

[67]. Matrix Const. Corp. v. Mecca Const., Inc., 578 So.2d 388 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991)

[68]. Fla. Stat. ' 713.345

[69]. Id.

[70]. Seabridge, Inc. v. Superior Kitchens, Inc., 672 So.2d 848 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996)

[71]. See also Fla. Stat. ' 255.071 for recovery of undisputed sums on public projects.

[72]. Fla. Stat. ' 713.346

[73]. Id.

[74]. Id.

[75]. Id.

[76]. Id.

[77]. Id.

[78]. Id.

[79]. Id.

[80]. Lee v. All Florida Const. Co., 662 So.2d 365 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995)

[81]. Biscayne Trust Co. v. Wolpert Realty & Improvement Co., 130 So. 611 (Fla. 1930)

[82]. Fla. Stat. ' 713.10

[83]. Id.

[84]. Id.

[85]. Id.

[86]. Van D. Costas, Inc. v. Rosenberg, 432 So.2d 656 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983)

[87]. Budget Elec. Co. v. Strauss, 417 So.2d 1143 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982)

[88]. Id.

[89]. Davidson Lumber Co. v. Sullivan, 403 So.2d 560 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981)

[90]. A.N. Drew, Inc. v. Frenchy's World Famous Cajun Cafe, Inc., 517 So.2d 766 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988)

[91]. Fla. Stat. ' 713.01(12)

[92]. Palm Beach Mall, Inc. v. Southeast Millwork, Inc., 593 So.2d 1121(Fla. 4th DCA 1992)

[93]. Legault v. Suncoast Lawn Service, Inc., 486 So.2d 72 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986)

[94]. E & E Elec. Co. v. Gold Coast 72nd St. Diner, Inc., 116 So.2d 660 (Fla. 3d DCA 1960)

[95]. Tamarac Village, Inc. v. Bates & Daly Co., 348 So.2d 23 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977)

[96]. See also Southern Gulf Utilities, Inc. v. United Benefit Fire Insurance Company, 179 So.2d 618 (Fla. 3d DCA 1965)

[97]. Ringling Bros.-Barum & Bailey Combined Shows, Inc. v. Hart, 390 So.2d 367 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980)

[98]. Renuart Lumber Yards, Inc. v. Stearn, 95 So.2d 517 (Fla. 1957)

[99]. Renuart Lumber Yards, Inc. v. Stearn, 95 So.2d 517 (Fla. 1957)

[100]. Adams v. McDonald, 356 So.2d 864 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978)

[101]. Id.

[102]. Fla. Sta. ' 713.07(4)

[103]. Meredith v. Lowe's of Florida, Inc., 405 So.2d 1061 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981)

[104]. Fla. Stat. ' 713.14

[105]. Fla. Stat. ' 713.14, See also Arlington Lumber & Trim Co., Inc. v. Vaughn, 548 So.2d 727 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989)

[106]. Fla. Stat. ' 713.15; National Steel Products Co. v. Donald L. Myrick & Associates, Inc., 353 So.2d 657 (Fla. 2d DCA 1977)

[107]. Fla. Stat. ' 713.15

[108]. Fla. Stat. ' 713.15

[109]. Fla. Stat. ' 713.15

[110]. Fla. Stat. ' 713.15

[111]. Matter of D.R. Goris Plumbing, Inc., 49 B.R. 146 (Bankr M.D. Fla. 1985)

[112]. County Nat. Bank of North Miami Beach v. Fierman, 188 So.2d 384 (Fla. 4th DCA 1966)

[113]. Id.

____________________________
(This article was first published in Building Florida, the monthly magazine of Associated Builders and Contractors, Issues 1 and 2, 2003)