SAAD HOMES, INC., APPELLANT,
v.
ORLANDO RIVERO AND LILIAN RIVERO, 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.
SAAD Homes appealed the denial of its motion to dismiss or transfer venue in a breach of contract action filed in Miami-Dade County. The court reversed, holding that venue was improper in Miami-Dade County because the property and lien foreclosure action were located in Broward County, where venue for mechanic's lien actions must be brought under Florida law.
The court held that Broward County is the appropriate venue because the property is located there. Mechanic's lien actions must be brought in rem in the county where the land is located. The trial court erred in denying SAAD's motion to dismiss or transfer venue.
[1] Actions to foreclose construction liens must be brought in the county where the land lies.
[2] A venue dispute concerning a construction lien foreclosure action is properly resolved by considering the location of the property subject to the lien.
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“actions in rem shall be brought in county where land lies”
Establishes the foundational rule that in rem actions, including mechanic's lien foreclosures, must be brought where the property is located.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe Riveros filed a breach of contract action in Miami-Dade County on September 24, 2007, arising from construction of a luxury home located in Browar…
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 Foreclosure Of Construction Lien cases and more on FLexlaw
SAAD Homes, Inc. (“SAAD”), appeals from an order denying a renewed motion to dismiss for improper venue or transfer to Broward County. We reverse.
On September 24, 2007, the Riveros filed, in Miami-Dade County, a breach of contract action arising out of the construction of a luxury home which was located in Broward County. On October 23, 2007, SAAD recorded, in Broward County, a claim of lien against the property. SAAD then filed a complaint in Broward County to foreclose on the construction lien and for breach of contract. On December 5, 2007, SAAD filed a notice of lis pendens in Broward County. SAAD moved, three times, to dismiss the Miami-Dade County *863action or to transfer to Broward County for improper venue. The trial court denied SAAD’s renewed motion to dismiss for improper venue or to transfer to Bro-ward County since discovery was outstanding on whether or not a fraudulent lien had been filed in Broward County.
SAAD contends on appeal of the non-final order that, because the mechanic’s lien foreclosure suit was filed in Broward County in accord with Florida law that requires actions to foreclose liens to be brought in the county where the land lies, the trial court erred in denying the motion to dismiss or to transfer venue to Broward County. See Ga. Cas. Co. v. O’Donnell, 109 Fla. 290, 147 So. 267 (1933) (holding that actions in rem shall be brought in county where land lies); accord Haws & Garrett Gen. Contractors, Inc. v. Panhandle Custom Decorators & Supply, Inc., 500 So.2d 204, 205 n. 3 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986); Tietig v. Riccio, 451 So.2d 1016 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984). SAAD further maintains that it would be barred from bringing a counterclaim on the lien to foreclose in Miami-Dade County because the lien is an in rem action against the property and must be brought in the circuit with jurisdiction over the property. E.g., Ruth v. Dep’t of Legal Affairs, 684 So.2d 181 (Fla.1996).
We agree that Broward County is the appropriate venue since the property is located in Broward County. Ga. Cas. Co. v. O’Donnell, 147 So. at 267; Mason v. Homes by Whitaker, Inc., 971 So.2d 1029 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008) (finding error in trial court’s denial of contractor’s motion to transfer venue to Clay County where construction lien was filed on property located in Clay County); Tietig v. Riccio, 451 So.2d at 1016 (holding that mechanic’s lien action shall be brought where property is located). In addition, the work occurred in Broward County and the alleged breach as well as the majority of evidence and witnesses were located there. The order denying the motion to dismiss is reversed and the cause remanded for transfer to Broward County.
Reversed and remanded with directions.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Schultz Builders & Pools, Inc. v. Icon Welding & Fabrication, LLC (Fla. 2d DCA 2023)…s that actions shall be brought only in the county where the property in litigation is located."). Schultz at once mischaracterizes the relief Icon seeks, while simultaneously managing to get ahead of itself. See, e.g., SAAD Homes, Inc. v. Rivero, 23 So. 3d 862, 863 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009) ("We agree that Broward County is the appropriate venue [for the mechanic's lien foreclosure suit] since the property is located in Broward County."); Mason v. Homes by Whitaker, Inc., 971 So. 2d 1029, 1030 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008…
Authorities Cited
- Ga. Cas. Co. v. O'Donnell, 109 Fla. 290 (Fla. 1933)
- Ruth v. Dep't OF Legal Affairs, 684 So. 2d 181 (Fla. 1996)
- Haws & Garrett Gen. Contractors v. Panhandle Custom Decorators & Supply, Inc., 500 So. 2d 204 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986)
- Mason v. Homes BY Whitaker, Inc., 971 So. 2d 1029 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008)
- Trott v. Hyacinth Beckford Trott, 451 So. 2d 1016 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984)
- Tietig v. Riccio, 451 So. 2d 1016 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984)