VISTA LANDSCAPING, INC., APPELLANT,
v.
ADAM C. HECK AND JACASA PROPERTIES, INC., ET AL., APPELLEES
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
A subcontractor appealed a summary judgment denying its claim for an equitable lien against undisbursed loan funds on a construction project. The court affirmed, holding that a subcontractor is not automatically entitled to an equitable lien simply because undisbursed loan funds exist, and that any claims based on alleged lender representations were foreclosed by prior Florida Supreme Court precedent.
The court held that a subcontractor is not entitled to an equitable lien against undisbursed loan funds merely because such funds exist, and that claims based on alleged lender representations were foreclosed by Supreme Court precedent in Rinker Materials.
[1] An equitable lien against undisbursed loan funds for a completed construction project is not automatically granted to a subcontractor or supplier based solely on the exis…
[2] A subcontractor's claim for an equitable lien based on affirmative deception requires a showing of facts distinct from those giving rise to a lien in prior cases.
Previewing 2 of 3 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“we do not believe the factual circumstances giving rise to the equitable lien in Morgen-Oswood are presented here”
The court distinguished the primary precedent relied upon by the appellant, establishing that the fact patterns were not analogous.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceVista Landscaping, a subcontractor, performed work on an apartment construction project financed by a second loan from the appellees (Heck and Jacasa …
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Affirmative Deception cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This is an appeal from a final summary judgment denying a subcontractor’s claim for an equitable lien against the undis-bursed balance of a second loan made by the appellees, to complete construction of an apartment project.
The appellant claims that he is entitled to an equitable lien against the loan funds on the basis of unjust enrichment and affirmative deception. First, appellant asserts that any time there is an undisbursed loan fund in existence on a completed construction project, a subcontractor or supplier is entitled to an equitable lien to the extent of his unpaid account. As a second ground, appellant claims that the lender here induced him into completing work on the project by representations that there were additional loan funds available to pay for all his work.
As to the first point, the appellant relies principally on Morgen-Oswood & Associates, Inc. v. Continental Mortgage Investors, 323 So. 2d 684 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975). However, we do not believe the factual circumstances giving rise to the equitable lien in Morgen-Oswood are presented here. For instance, it is undisputed that the appellant’s lien rights on the project in question are superior to any claim or lien of appellees arising out of the second loan. The only prior lien rights being asserted by the appellees are those arising out of the initial loan which was totally disbursed well before the project was completed. We believe the second issue has been determined adversely to the appellant’s claim by the Supreme Court’s decision in Rinker Materials v. Palmer First National Bank, 361 So. 2d 156 (Fla.1978).
Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
ANSTEAD and LETTS, JJ., and WETH-ERINGTON, GERALD, Associate Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Gentry Mfg. Co., Inc. v. Heck, 366 So. 2d 1263 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979)…PER CURIAM. AFFIRMED. See Vista Landscaping, Inc. v. Heck, 366 So. 2d 1264, Case No. 77-2106 (Fla. 4th DCA, opinion filed this date). ANSTEAD and LETTS, JJ., and WETH-ERINGTON, GERALD, Associate Judge, concur.…
-
Simpson v. Heck, 366 So. 2d 1263 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979)…PER CURIAM. AFFIRMED. See Vista Landscaping, Inc. v. Heck, 366 So. 2d 1264, Case No. 77-2106 (Fla. 4th DCA, opinion filed this date). ANSTEAD and LETTS, JJ., and WETH-ERINGTON, GERALD, Associate Judge, concur.…
Authorities Cited
- Rinker Materials Corp. v. The Palmer First Nat'l Bank & Tr. Co. OF Sarasota, 361 So. 2d 156 (Fla. 1978)
- Morgen-Oswood & Assocs. v. Cont'l Mortg. Invs., 323 So. 2d 684 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975)