A. PAUL PROSPERI, APPELLANT,
v.
CODE, INC., APPELLEE

Fla. 4th DCA | 1992-11-04
No. 91-2930
Warner, J., Polen, J., Dimitrouleas, William P., Associate Judge
609 So. 2d 59 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (1992) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

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.

Synopsis

The court affirmed the denial of attorney's fees to a property owner who prevailed on a mechanics lien defense but lost on a related breach of contract claim, declining to extend the Moritz prevailing-party test to mechanics lien statutes without supreme court guidance.


Holding

An owner who successfully defends a mechanics lien claim but loses on a related breach of contract action is not entitled to attorney's fees under section 713.29, Florida Statutes.


Headnotes

[1] An owner who successfully defends a mechanics lien claim but loses on a related breach of contract action is not entitled to attorney's fees under section 713.29, Florida…

Previewing 1 of 1 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

Facts & Procedural History

Prosperi successfully defended against a mechanics lien claim brought by Code, Inc., but a judgment was rendered against Prosperi on a related breach …

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.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the order of the trial court denying attorney’s fees to an owner who successfully defended a mechanics lien claim but against whom a judgment on a related breach of contract action was rendered. M & P Concrete Products, Inc. v. Woods, 590 So. 2d 429 (Fla. 4th DCA), rev. dismissed, 589 So. 2d 294 (Fla.1991). See also AAA Sod, Inc. v. Weitzer Corp., 513 So. 2d 750 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987); General Dev. Corp. v. John H. Gossett Const. Co., 370 So. 2d 380 (Fla. 2d DCA), cert. denied, 379 So. 2d 205 (Fla.1979). We certify the same question as was certified in M & P Concrete Products.

We acknowledge the supreme court’s recent opinion in Moritz v. Hoyt Enterprises, Inc., 604 So. 2d 807 (Fla.1992), in which it held that the test for determining who is the prevailing party for purposes of awarding attorney’s fees in a contract action is “to allow the trial judge to determine from the record which party has in fact prevailed on the significant issues tried before the court.” Id. at 810. It may be that the supreme court will extend that test to cases involving attorney’s fees awarded under section 713.29, Florida Statutes (1991). Indeed there is room in the statute for such an equitable approach. See e.g. S. C.M. Assoc. Inc. v. Rhodes, 395 So. 2d 632, 634 n. 2 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981).

However, given the heretofore uniform approach of most courts on this issue, we are loathe to upset this precedent without guidance from our higher authority.

WARNER and POLEN, JJ., and DIMITROULEAS, WILLIAM P., Associate Judge, concur.

Other
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

We grant rehearing in part to include the following question as one of great public importance:

DOES THE TEST OF MORITZ V. HOYT FOR DETERMINING WHO IS THE PREVAILING PARTY FOR THE PURPOSES OF AWARDING ATTORNEY’S FEES APPLY TO FEES AWARDED UNDER SECTION 713.29, FLORIDA STATUTES?

WARNER and POLEN, JJ., and DIMITROULEAS, WILLIAM P., Associate Judge, concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Prosperi v. Code, Inc., 626 So. 2d 1360 (Fla. 1993)
    …GRIMES, Justice. We review Prosperi v. Code, Inc., 609 So. 2d 59 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992), in which the court certified the following as questions of great public importance: IS AN OWNER WHO PREVAILS ON A COMPLAINT BY A CONTRACTOR OR SUB-CONTRACTOR TO ENFORCE A MECHANIC’S LIEN UNDER PART I, CHAPTER 713, FLORIDA STATU…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw