THE SCHOOL BOARD OF BROWARD COUNTY, FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
THE TRANE COMPANY, A DIVISION OF AMERICAN STANDARD, INC., A DELAWARE CORPORATION AUTHORIZED TO TRANSACT BUSINESS WITHIN THE STATE OF FLORIDA, AND MULTI AIR FLOW SYSTEM & APPLIANCE, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, 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 School Board of Broward County appeals from judgments imposing an equitable lien on retained construction funds in favor of Trane Company, an unpaid subcontractor. The court affirms, holding that an equitable lien may be imposed on statutorily retained funds even against a government entity, and that sovereign immunity does not bar such relief.
The court affirmed the imposition of an equitable lien on the retained funds in favor of Trane. Sovereign immunity does not bar an equitable lien on statutorily retained funds. Trane, being the only unpaid subcontractor making a claim against the retainage, was entitled to the full amount owed without pro-rata limitation. Pre-judgment interest was properly awarded within the trial court's discretion.
[1] An equitable lien may be impressed upon funds retained by a public entity pursuant to statute, even in the absence of a payment bond, when a subcontractor remains unpaid.
[2] A public entity's sovereign immunity does not bar the imposition of an equitable lien on statutorily retained funds owed to a contractor.
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“the record clearly supports the imposition of an equitable lien on these statutorily retained funds”
Establishes the court's core holding that equitable liens can be imposed on retained construction funds despite sovereign immunity claims
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe School Board hired Multi-Air Flow to renovate an elementary school for $200,000 without requiring payment or performance bonds. Multi-Air Flow sub…
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 Payment Bond cases and more on FLexlaw
STREITFELD, JEFFREY E., Associate Judge.
The School Board of Broward County (the School Board) appeals from two Final Judgments entered in these consolidated cases that impress an equitable lien upon funds retained pursuant to section 255.05, Florida Statutes (1998). We affirm.
The School Board entered into a construction contract with Multi-Air Flow System & Appliance, Inc. (Multi-Air Flow) in 1997 for the renovation of an elementary school for a total price of $200,000. The School Board did not require Multi-Air Flow to provide any payment or performance bonds. Multi-Air Flow contracted with appellee, The Trane Company (Trane), to supply and install the air conditioning equipment. Toward the end of the job, a fire destroyed much of the work at which time the School Board chose to terminate the contract with Multi-Air Flow.
The School Board retained the sum of $74,600 from the contract amount because Multi-Air Flow did not provide releases indicating proof of payments to subcontractors. In March 1998, pursuant to section 255.05, Florida Statutes, Trane made a formal demand for $42,129.51, the sum that remained unpaid for materials delivered to the job site.
In March 1999, Trane was forced to file a complaint against Multi-Air Flow 'and the School Board to enforce its right to a ratable percentage of the retained funds. Within two months, Trane obtained a judgment by default against Multi-Air Flow, who by then was insolvent. However, the School Board aggressively defended for two years, asserting sovereign immunity, the economic loss rule and a denial that any monies were owed to Multi-Air Flow.
By 2001, the case was ripe for summary adjudication. The School Board disavowed any interest in the retained funds. The only other subcontractor who was a potential claimant against the fund, Mr. Electric, was owed $24,600, with interest, but had expressly waived its claim against the fund, had opposed intervention, and opposed the School Board’s last minute efforts to interplead the retained funds.
On November 21, 2001, the trial court entered an Amended Final Summary Judgment against the School Board, imposing an equitable lien against the retained funds withheld by the School Board and owed to Multi-Air Flow, in the sum of $42,129.51, with an additional $25,500 in pre-judgment interest and costs. A subsequent judgment was entered for post-judgment attorneys fees and costs in the sum of $33,500.
The School Board raises three issues on appeal, claiming: 1) the equitable lien claim is barred by sovereign immunity; 2) Trane may not recover more that its pro-rata share of the retained funds; and 3) the award of pre-judgment interest is barred by sovereign immunity.
With respect to the School Board’s first claim, the record clearly supports the imposition of an equitable lien on these statutorily retained funds. See Crane v. Fine, 221 So. 2d 145 (Fla.1969); U.S. Fid. & Guar. Co. v. Ernest Constr. Co., 854 F.Supp. 1545 (M.D.Fla.1994); Kennedy Elec. Co. v. U.S. Postal Serv., 508 F. 2d 954 (10th Cir.1974). The School Board’s reliance on Pavex Corp. v. Broward County, 498 So. 2d 1317 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986), and Board of County Commissioners of Okaloosa County v. Gulf Pipeline Co., 168 So. 2d 757 (Fla. 1st DCA 1964), is misplaced. In each of these cases, payment bonds had been posted which afforded the unpaid subcontractors adequate legal remedies.
In response to the School Board’s second claim, we note that Trane was the only unpaid subcontractor who made a claim against the retainage. Mr. Electric expressly waived its claim against the fund. Therefore, the trial court did not err in fading to limit the lien imposed by it.
As to the School Board’s third claim, imposition of an award of prejudgment interest was within the trial court’s discretion, and no abuse has-been shown. See Blasland, Bouck & Lee, Inc. v. City of North Miami, 283 F. 3d 1286 (11th Cir. 2002).
Affirmed.
GUNTHER and FARMER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Ileana Morales v. Gilda Rosenberg, 919 So. 2d 476 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005)…to award Morales prejudgment interest. The trial court’s decision is also supportable on the alternate ground articulated by the trial court that Morales unduly delayed the resolution of the case. See School Bd. of Broward County, Fla. v. Trane Co., 840 So. 2d 1095, 1097 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003)(applying abuse of discretion standard to imposition of award of prejudgment interest); Volks [*480] wagen of America, Inc. v. Smith, 690 So. 2d 1328, 1331 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997)(recognizing that it is proper to reduce or even…
Authorities Cited
- Crane Co. v. Fine, 221 So. 2d 145 (Fla. 1969)
- Kennedy Elec. Co., Inc. v. United States Postal Serv., 508 F.2d 954 (10th Cir. 1974)
- Blasland v. City OF N. Miami, 283 F.3d 1286 (11th Cir. 2002)
- Bd. OF Cnty. Comm'rs OF Okaloosa Cnty. v. Gulf Pipeline Co., Inc., 168 So. 2d 757 (Fla. 1st DCA 1964)
- Pavex Corp. v. Broward Cnty. Bd. of Cnty. Comm'rs, 498 So. 2d 1317 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986)
- United States Fid. & Guar. Co. v. Ernest Constr. Co., 854 F. Supp. 1545 (M.D. Fla. 1994)