CURRENT CONTROL, INC., PETITIONER,
v.
BANKERS INSURANCE COMPANY, RESPONDENT
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.
Current Control sought to enforce a mechanic's lien claim in county court, but the claim had been transferred to a surety bond provided by Bankers Insurance. The circuit court issued a writ of prohibition preventing the county court from hearing the case, and the appellate court affirmed, holding that actions on surety bonds under Florida's mechanic's lien statute must be brought in circuit court, not county court.
Actions on surety bonds to which mechanic's lien claims have been transferred must be brought in circuit court, not county court. Although mechanic's lien foreclosure actions may be brought in either circuit or county court (subject to monetary limits), the statute expressly requires that actions on bonds transferred pursuant to section 713.24 be filed in circuit court.
[1] Actions to enforce a claim of lien transferred to a bond must be filed in circuit court, regardless of the amount involved.
[2] The legislature has the authority to define the jurisdiction of state courts.
Previewing 2 of 4 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“Any party having an interest in such security or the property from which the lien was transferred may at any time, and any number of times, file a complaint in chancery in the circuit court of the county where such security is deposited, or file a motion in a pending action to enforce a lien, for an order to require additional security, reduction of security, change or substitution of sureties, payment of discharge thereof, or any other matter affecting said security.”
Section 713.24(3), Fla. Stat. establishing that actions on bonds must be brought in circuit court
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceCurrent Control filed a complaint in county court to enforce a lien claim of $6,135.95 for electrical services and materials provided for a residence.…
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 Action On A Bond cases and more on FLexlaw
COBB, Judge.
Current Control, Inc. seeks a writ of certiorari from this court to challenge a writ of prohibition issued by the circuit court on behalf of Bankers Insurance Company. We treat the petition as a direct appeal. But see State v. Frazee, 617 So. 2d 350 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993). Initially, Current Control filed a complaint in county court seeking to enforce its claim of lien in the amount of $6,135.95 (paid electrical services and materials for a residence). The lien was transferred to a bond which had been provided by Bankers. Bankers thereupon moved to dismiss on the basis that the county court lacked subject matter jurisdiction. On denial of the motion to dismiss, Bankers sought and obtained a writ of prohibition irom the circuit court on the same ground, giving rise to the instant appeal to this court.
This case involves an action brought on a bond which is executed pursuant to section 713.24, Florida Statutes. Subsection (3) thereof expressly provides:
Any party having an interest in such security or the property from which the lien was transferred may at any time, and any number of times, file a complaint in chancery in the circuit court of the county where such security is deposited, or file a motion in a pending action to enforce a lien, for an order to require additional security, reduction of security, change or substitution of sureties, payment of discharge thereof, or any other matter affecting said security.
The appellant, Current Control, relies on the case of Alexdex Corp. v. Nachon Enterprises, Inc., 641 So. 2d 858 (Fla.1994), which involved an action to foreclose a construction lien. The supreme court pointed out that a lien foreclosure action is an action in equity and that, under general law, circuit courts and county courts within their statutorily set monetary limits have concurrent jurisdiction in matters of equity. Because the cause of action involved in Alexdex involved an amount within the statutory monetary limits of the county court, the action was properly brought in county court.
The distinction between this case and Alexdex is that our case involves an action on a surety bond to which the mechanic’s lien claims were transferred. Such an action, like all mechanic’s lien law, is a creature of statute. The statute here expressly provides that such actions be filed in circuit court. It is for the legislature to define the jurisdiction of the state courts (consistent, of course, with the state constitution). It has expressly done so here. While it may be difficult to explain why a mechanic’s lien foreclosure action can be brought in either circuit or county court (subject to compliance with monetary limits), while an action on a surety bond must be brought in circuit court irrespective of the amount involved, it is for the legislature, if it so desires, to cure this seeming inconsistency-
Accordingly, we affirm the issuance of the writ of prohibition by the circuit court.
AFFIRMED.
PETERSON, C.J., and HARRIS, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
W.W. Plastering v. Chism Constr. Inc., 867 So. 2d 600 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004)…rejudice the appellant’s action against the security bond. Circuit courts have exclusive jurisdiction over actions against liens transferred to security bonds. See § 713.24(3), Fla. Stat. (2000); see also Current Control, Inc. v. Bankers Ins. Co., 679 So. 2d 78, 78-79 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996); Stel-Den of America, Inc. v. Roof Structures, Inc., 438 So. 2d 882, 884 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983). Moreover, unless an owner elects to shorten the time for filing an action against a bond by following the procedures set forth i…
-
Sayre v. JMC Painting, Inc., 778 So. 2d 430 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001)…ond pursuant to section 713.24(3) (providing that actions on transfer liens may be filed in circuit court), and for that reason it vacated the county court’s final judgment in favor of the two sureties. See Current Control, Inc. v. Bankers Ins. Co., 679 So. 2d 78 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996); Stel-Den of Am., Inc. v. Roof Structures, Inc., 438 So. 2d 882 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983). However, because petitioner erred by filing in a court without jurisdiction, the circuit court ordered that the portion of the trial court’s fin…
Authorities Cited
- Alexdex Corp. v. Nachon Enters., Inc., 641 So. 2d 858 (Fla. 1994)
- State v. Frazee, 617 So. 2d 350 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993)