THE SCHOOL BOARD OF DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
LARRY LEATHERWOOD, KINGSWOOD SOUTH, INC., AND C.O.B.A.D. CONSTRUCTION CORP., APPELLEES
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 trial court erred in granting summary judgment because the School Board did not waive its right to assert defenses and the settlement agreement did not waive its right to contest the subcontractor's claims.
A subcontractor sued the general contractor for sums owed. The general contractor brought in the School Board as a third-party defendant due to contra…
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 Third-Party Defendant cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
We deny Appellees’ motion for rehearing, but withdraw our opinion issued February 26,1997, and substitute the following opinion:
This lawsuit arose when Kingswood South, Inc., a subcontractor, brought suit against C.O.B.A.D. Construction Corp., the general contractor, for sums allegedly owed it. C.O.B.A.D. brought in the School Board of Dade County as a third-party defendant because the School Board was contractually liable for any money judgment Kingswood might obtain against C.O.B.A.D.
We reverse the summary judgment entered against C.O.B.A.D. Construction Corp. and in favor of the plaintiff subcontractor, Kingswood South, Inc., for sums allegedly owed the subcontractor. Although the general contractor did not contest the subcontractor’s claim, the School Board of Dade County, Appellant, asserted defenses on the general contractor’s behalf, as its defenses as a third-party defendant would be directly impacted by a determination on the merits. See McLaughlin v. Pernsley, 876 F. 2d 308, 313 (3d Cir.1989); F & D Property Co. v. Alkire, 385 F. 2d 97, 100 (10th Cir.1967); Zuberbuhler v. Div. of Admin., Florida Dep’t of Transp., 344 So. 2d 1304, 1306 (Fla. 2d DCA 1977). Summary judgment should not have been entered, as the record reflects that the trial court misinterpreted an earlier settlement agreement between the School Board and the general contractor as waiving the School Board’s right to assert defenses against the subcontractor’s claims.
Our reading of the settlement agreement reflects that the School Board unambiguously reserved the right to contest the claims of this subcontractor. The trial court also misinterpreted the terms of the subcontract in concluding that the general conditions of the prime contract between the School Board and the general contractor were not incorporated into the subcontract.
We remand for further proceedings on the merits of the claim and defenses.
GLICKSTEIN, STONE and STEVENSON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Zuberbuhler v. Division OF Administration, 344 So. 2d 1304 (Fla. 2d DCA 1977)
- The F & D Prop. Co. v. Alkire, 385 F.2d 97 (10th Cir. 1967)
- McLaughlin v. Pernsley, 876 F.2d 308 (3d Cir. 1989)