ORLANDO DINNER ENTERTAINMENT, INC., ETC., APPELLANT/CROSS-APPELLEE,
v.
SPAN SYSTEMS, INC., ETC., ET AL., 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 a single notice of commencement was sufficient for both a subcontract and a direct contract on the same project, entitling both liens to equal priority. The court also found no fundamental error in the trial court's judgments despite claims of inconsistent verdicts.
Orlando Dinner (owner) contracted with Kelsey (general contractor), who subcontracted with Span. Span also had a direct contract with Orlando Dinner. …
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 Notice Of Commencement cases and more on FLexlaw
HARRIS, J.
This case involves a construction project in which Orlando Dinner Entertainment, Inc. was the owner, while Kelsey Construction, Inc. was the general contractor and Span Systems, Inc. served both under a subcontract with Kelsey and under a direct contract with the owner. The judge entered a judgment against the owner and established a lien in favor of Kelsey on the direct contract (after a set-off because of poor performance of the roof work performed by Span) and a judgment in favor of Span against Kelsey (with the same set-off for poor performance of the roof, contract). Span also received a judgment establishing a lien against the owner under their direct contract.
Orlando Dinner appeals both judgments against it claiming inconsistent verdicts. No objection was made at the time the verdicts were returned and we find no fundamental error. We affirm all judgments.
Span cross-appeals the finding by the trial court that the lien established in favor of Kelsey has priority over the lien found in favor of Span. We agree that under the facts of this case the filing of a single notice of commencement was sufficient to include not only Span’s subcontract with Kelsey but also Span’s separate direct contract with the owner relating to a single project. The liens are entitled to equal priority.
AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part and REMANDED.
SAWAYA, J., and ORFINGER, M., Senior Judge, concur.