EDWARD C. TIETIG, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS CO-PARTNER, AND VILLASOL REALTY CO., A FLORIDA CORPORATION AS CO-PARTNER; D/B/A THE PARK APARTMENTS LTD., APPELLANTS,
v.
HENRY A. RICCIO, APPELLEE

Fla. 3d DCA | 1984-06-19
No. 84-310
Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and BARK-DULL and FERGUSON, JJ.
451 So. 2d 1016 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1984) Caution
Cited by 3 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

Because plaintiffs suit seeks primarily foreclosure of a mechanic’s lien on real property, even though damages are sought as an alternative remedy, the action should have been brought in Brevard County where the property is situated. See Georgia Casualty Co. v. O’Donnell, 109 Fla. 290, 147 So. 267 (1933); Sales v. Berzin, 212 So. 2d 23 (Fla. 4th DCA 1968) (a suit to foreclose mortgage is local, and must be brought in county where land lies, even though other relief, such as deficiency judgment, may be granted).

Reversed with instructions to transfer venue or dismiss.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

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

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw