WILLIAM CHARLES TROTT, APPELLANT,

v.

HYACINTH BECKFORD TROTT, APPELLEE

Citator

Cited By

• Haws & Garrett Gen. Contractors v. Panhandle Custom Decorators & Supply, Inc., 500 So. 2d 204 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986)
  …f the third prong. The suit at bar was one to foreclose a mechanic's lien on real property [*206] located in Okaloosa County, Florida. The general rule is that such suits must be brought in the county where the property is located. Tietig v. Riccio, 451 So. 2d 1016 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984). But see Meka Construction Corporation v. Village Mall of Port Orange, Ltd., 469 So. 2d 838 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985) (parties’ choice of venue approved, notwithstanding suit was one to foreclose a mechanic’s lien, on the ground that th…
• Meka Constr. Corp. v. Vill. Mall OF Port Orange, Ltd., 469 So. 2d 838 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985)
  …Const.; § 26.012, Fla. Stat. (1983). A court’s subject matter jurisdiction is not inhibited because of its particular venue. See Ringling Bros. Barnum & Bailey Combined Shows, Inc. v. State, 295 So. 2d 314 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974). In Tietig v. Riccio, 451 So. 2d 1016 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984), the court held that an action to foreclose a mechanic’s lien should be brought in the county where the property is located. Tietig v. Riccio is inapposite to the instant case because, there, the parties did not contractually prov…
• Saad Homes, Inc. v. Rivero, 23 So. 3d 862 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009)
  …147 So. 267 (1933) (holding that actions in rem shall be brought in county where land lies); accord Haws & Garrett Gen. Contractors, Inc. v. Panhandle Custom Decorators & Supply, Inc., 500 So. 2d 204, 205 n. 3 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986); Tietig v. Riccio, 451 So. 2d 1016 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984). SAAD further maintains that it would be barred from bringing a counterclaim on the lien to foreclose in Miami-Dade County because the lien is an in rem action against the property and must be brought in the circuit with jurisdict…

Authorities Cited

• Canakaris v. Canakaris, 382 So. 2d 1197 (Fla. 1980)