MAGNUM CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT CORPORATION, D/B/A MCM CORPORATION, APPELLANT,
v.
ARSO ENTERPRISES, INC., D/B/A SOL A TROL ALUMINUM PRODUCTS, APPELLEE

Fla. 3d DCA | 2002-08-14
No. 3D02-92
Before JORGENSON, GODERICH, and SHEVIN, JJ.
824 So. 2d 959 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (2002) Positive Treatment
Cited by 5 cases


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

In the underlying suit, a general contractor, Magnum Construction Management Corporation d/b/a MCM Corporation [MCM], entered into an agreement with Miami Dade County for the replacement of windows at an elderly housing facility. After the new windows were installed, they leaked. MCM filed suit against the County for nonpayment, and the County filed a counterclaim seeking damages as a result of the defective windows. MCM, in turn, amended its complaint by interlineation and sought indemnification from the manufacturer of the windows, Arso Enterprises, Inc., d/b/a Sol A Trol Aluminum Products. The trial court conducted a sixteen-day bench trial and specifically rejected MCM’s defense that the defects were caused by the manufacturer. Accordingly, we find that the trial court properly denied MCM’s claim for indemnification.

We affirm the final judgments under review.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • E. Ave., LLC v. Insignia Bank, 136 So. 3d 659 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014)
    …inal in form and remands with instructions to enter an interlocutory order on the issues decided to date. It leaves any appellate issues related to the merits to be determined in a later appeal from the final judgment in the case. Molina v. Watkins, 824 So. 2d 959, 964 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002); see also Investacorp, Inc. v. Evans, 88 So. 3d 248 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011); Hugh F. Culverhouse, Jr., P.A. v. Barth, 699 So. 2d 795 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997). This approach has much to recommend it. It permits the judgment debtor to ap…
  • Investacorp, Inc. v. Evans, 88 So. 3d 248 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011)
    …rial court to let execution issue on a partial summary judgment for damages.” New Saga Corp. v. Strongwill Corp., 565 So. 2d 407, 408 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990); see also Rothermel v. BXL Assocs., 24 So. 3d 664, 665-66 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009); Molina v. Watkins, 824 So. 2d 959, 964 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002); Baumann v. Intracoastal Pac. Ltd. P’ship, 619 So. 2d 403 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993). Here, although the trial court reserved jurisdiction to consider the interrelated civil theft count, the partial judgment awarding damages on the c…
  • Surijon v. Zarria, 278 So. 3d 328 (Fla. 3d DCA 2019)
    …rlocutory order against Surijon as to Count II (unjust enrichment), without words of execution, and to retain jurisdiction to consider the pending related claims.2 See Investacorp, Inc. v. Evans, 88 So. 3d 248 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011); Molina v. Watkins, 824 So. 2d 959 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002); Culverhouse v. Barth, 699 So. 2d 795 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997); Del Castillo v. Ralor Pharmacy, Inc., 512 So. 2d 315 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987); but see East Avenue, LLC v. Insignia Bank, 136 So. 3d 659 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014). Further, we direct t…

Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw