AHIMSA TECHNIC, INC., APPELLANT/CROSS-APPELLEE,
v.
LIGHTHOUSE SHORES TOWN HOMES DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, APPELLEE/CROSS-APPELLANT
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.
The court held that the mechanic's lien was untimely filed, but the breach of contract claim should succeed as there was no evidence of breach.
Appellant performed engineering services under an oral contract. Appellee refused final payment, claiming breach of contract due to poor design. Appel…
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 Mechanic'S Lien Foreclosure cases and more on FLexlaw
DAUKSCH, Judge.
Appellant performed engineering services for appellee under an oral contract to design a storm water management system for appellee’s townhouse development. Upon completion of the contract, appellee refused to pay appellant’s final bill claiming appellant breached the oral contract by failing to professionally perform its duties in designing the storm water management system. Appellant sued for foreclosure of a mechanic’s lien and breach of. contract.
We agree with the trial court that the mechanic’s lien was untimely filed and affirm the final judgment as to this count. We reverse the judgment as to the breach of contract count because there is no evidence that appellant breached the contract. The expert testimony was clear and unequivocal that appellant presented appellee with valid engineering alternatives, which were accepted by the city engineers, and performed all services within the standard of care required of professional engineers in the community. In addition, the oral contract did not have an express provision requiring appellant to disclose its sources for the engineering calculations used in the design.
Upon remand, the trial court should enter a judgment in favor of appellant for breach of contract and hold a hearing on damages. Consequently, appellee will no longer be the prevailing party entitled to attorney’s fees under section 713.29, Florida Statutes (1987) because appellant will obtain a money judgment for services under the contract even though it failed to establish a mechanic’s lien. See Plaza Builders, Inc. v. Regis, 502 So. 2d 918, 920 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986); Schabert v. Montaltos, 445 So. 2d 1136, 1137 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984). The award of attorney’s fees is also reversed.
REVERSED and REMANDED.
SHARP, C.J., and COWART, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Philippe H. Moransais v. Heathman, 744 So. 2d 973 (Fla. 1999)…c. v. D.E. Britt Assocs., Inc., 168 So. 2d 333 (Fla. 2d DCA 1964) (involving suit against [*977] design engineer based on alleged negligent design and preparation of wooden trusses); cf. Ahimsa Technic, Inc. v. Lighthouse Shores Town Homes Dev. Co., 543 So. 2d 422 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989) (reversing judgment for breach of contract against engineer where engineer performed services within standard of care required of professional engineers).5 The question remains, however, under the Second District’s analysis, as…
-
Prosperi v. Code, Inc., 626 So. 2d 1360 (Fla. 1993)…rance of being fully compensated for his labor or services. Emery, 249 So. 2d at 500.1 This principle has been consistently fohowed in subsequent decisions. M & P Concrete Prods., Inc.; Ahimsa Technic, Inc. v. Lighthouse Shores Town Homes Dev. Co., 543 So. 2d 422 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989); AAA Sod, Inc. v. Weitzer Corp., 513 So. 2d 750 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987); Plaza Builders, Inc. v. Regis, 502 So. 2d 918 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986); Magee v. Bishop Signs, Inc., 458 So. 2d 1174 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984); Schabert v. Montaltos, 445 S…
-
Lochrane Eng'g, Inc. v. Willingham Realgrowth Inv. Fund, Ltd., 552 So. 2d 228 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989)…to the basis for A.R. Moyer, Inc. v. Graham, 285 So. 2d 397 (Fla.1973). See abo E.C. Goldman, Inc. v. A/R/C Associates, Inc., 543 So. 2d 1268 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989). . See e.g., Ahimsa Technic, Inc. v. Lighthouse Shores Town Homes Development Company, 543 So. 2d 422 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989). Sometimes the professional opinion of a competent physician is that a certain medical treatment will cause his patient to recover but it does not. Sometimes a competent attorney is of the professional opinion that the assertion…
Authorities Cited
- Plaza Builders, Inc. v. Regis, 502 So. 2d 918 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986)
- Schabert v. Montaltos, 445 So. 2d 1136 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984)