BRUCE SCHOFIELD, APPELLANT,

v.

THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Citator

Cited By

• Miracle Ctr. Dev. Corp. v. M.A.D. Constr., Inc., 662 So. 2d 1288 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995)
  …ease between Miracle Center and Theme required such improvements to the property; or (2) under judicial interpretation, if the improvements to the property were the “pith of the lease.” Cf. A.N. Drew, Inc. v. Frenchy’s World Famous Cajun Cafe, Inc., 517 So. 2d 766 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988) (seeming to entertain these two scenarios as if they were one in the same). Miracle Center’s lease with Theme explicitly provided that for any improvements Theme wished to make to the leased premises, Miracle Center’s ownership…
• 14TH & Heinberg, L.L.C. v. Henricksen & Co., Inc., 877 So. 2d 34 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004)
  …e pith or essence of the Lease as neither the Lease nor the Amendment indicates that the improvements were vital to the Lease’s perpetually. Appellees instead rely on our previous opinion in AN. Drew, Inc. v. Frenchy’s World Famous Cajun Cafe, Inc., 517 So. 2d 766 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988), in support of their argument that appellant’s interest is subject to the liens because it and Montgomery Ward contemplated that the improvements would be made. However, we reject appellees’ broad construction of that opinion. I…
• MHB Constr. Servs., L.L.C. v. Rm-Na HB Waterway Shoppes, L.L.C., 74 So. 3d 587 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011)
  …of subsection 2. See § 713.10(2) Fla. Stat. The lease and Notice of Lien Prohibition expressly prohibited claims of lien for improvements made by Tenant from attaching to the property. See A.N. Drew, Inc. v. Frenchy’s World Famous Cajun Cafe, Inc., 517 So. 2d 766, 768 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988) (“Where the terms of the lease indicate either the lessee or the lessor contemplated the improvements being made, the lessor’s interest will be subject to mechanics’ liens unless the lessor records the necessary disclaimer.”…

Authorities Cited

• Duest v. State, 462 So. 2d 446 (Fla. 1985)
• Williams v. State, 454 So. 2d 790 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984)
• Perry v. Sawyer, 454 So. 2d 790 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984)