ZOFIA ZAK RHODES AND RUDY RHODES, APPELLANTS,
v.
NEWPORT BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION, INC., APPELLEE
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 Rhodes appealed a trial court judgment foreclosing a construction lien filed by Newport Building and Construction, Inc. after the Rhodes withheld final payment due to construction defects. The court reversed the foreclosure judgment because the Rhodes had already paid the full arbitration award, making lien enforcement unnecessary, and dismissed the appeal regarding attorney's fees as premature.
The foreclosure judgment must be reversed because payment of the arbitration award constituted full settlement of the controversy, making lien enforcement unnecessary. The portion of the appeal regarding attorney's fees is dismissed as premature because the trial court determined entitlement to fees but not the amount.
[1] A construction lien is rendered unnecessary and unenforceable once the underlying debt has been paid in full, even if an arbitration award was involved.
[2] Payment of an arbitration award and its acceptance by the claimant constitutes a settlement of the dispute between the parties, precluding further enforcement actions.
Previewing 2 of 3 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“Payment of the arbitration award and acceptance of the same constituted settlement of the real controversy between the parties.”
Establishes that full payment of the arbitration award settled the dispute, making lien enforcement unnecessary
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe Rhodes hired Newport to build a waterfront home. When nearing completion, the Rhodes withheld the final payment of $23,983.01 due to dissatisfacti…
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
Zofia and Rudy Rhodes (the Rhodes) appeal from the final judgment foreclosing a construction lien on their property and awarding Newport Building and Construction, Inc. (Newport) attorney’s fees. We reverse the order foreclosing the lien and dismiss the appeal to the extent that it challenges entitlement to fees.
The Rhodes hired Newport to build a waterfront home. When the home was nearing completion, the Rhodes were unsatisfied with the quality of the construction and withheld the final payment of $23,983.01 until the defects in the workmanship could be resolved. Newport filed a claim of lien for the balance due on the contract and then filed a complaint seeking to enforce and foreclose the construction lien. The Rhodes filed a counterclaim alleging that Newport had breached its contract by failing to complete the contract according to the plans and specifications. The parties stipulated that the Rhodes were entitled to a credit of $2586 for unfinished labor and, therefore the unpaid balance of the contract due and owing was $21,397.01.
The parties submitted their dispute to arbitration and, following a hearing, an arbitrator found that Newport had breached the contract and that the Rhodes were entitled to set off $18,000 in damages from the amount owed on the contract, leaving a balance of $3397.01 due to Newport. The Rhodes paid Newport the arbitration award in full. Nonetheless, Newport filed a motion to enforce and convert the arbitration decision to a judgment and to foreclose the lien. Newport also sought an award of attorney’s fees. The trial court granted the motion and entered a final judgment of foreclosure. We reverse.
Once the Rhodes paid the arbitration award, it was unnecessary to enforce the lien. Cf Beach Resorts Int’l, *1247 Inc. v. Clarmac Marine Constr. Co., 339 So.2d 689, 692 (Fla. 2d DCA 1976) (holding that because the defendant submitted payment of the arbitration award to the plaintiff “no enforcement was needed and the application of a mechanic’s lien was unnecessary”). “Payment of the arbitration award and acceptance of the same constituted settlement of the real controversy between the parties.” Id. Accordingly, Newport was not entitled to a judgment of foreclosure.
In the final judgment, the court also found that Newport was the prevailing party and was entitled to an award of attorney’s fees and costs but reserved jurisdiction as to the amount. Because the order determines that Newport is entitled to fees but does not determine the amount, it is a nonfinal order not yet ripe for appellate review. See Allstate Ins. Co. v. Jenkins, 32 So.3d 163, 165 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010) (“[A]n attorney’s fee award is not appealable until both the issues of entitlement and amount are ruled upon.”). Accordingly, we dismiss the portion of the appeal regarding the trial court’s ruling on attorney’s fees.
Reversed in part; dismissed in part.
WALLACE and KHOUZAM, JJ., Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Catalina Halnat, LLC v. SUN City Vending OF S.F., Inc., 103 So. 3d 927 (Fla. 3d DCA 2012)…lement to attorney’s fees, but it is not final or appealable because the amount to be awarded has not yet been determined. E.g., Low Key Ltd., Inc. v. Annesser, — So. 3d -, 2012 WL 4795672 (Fla. 3d DCA 2012); Rhodes v. Newport Bldg. & Constr., Inc., 86 So. 3d 1245, 1247 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012). Conclusion This appeal is dismissed. The dismissal is without prejudice to the appellants’ right to seek review of a final judgment fixing the amount of attorney’s fees payable by them (if and when such a final award is m…
-
LOW KEY Ltd., Inc. v. Annesser, 128 So. 3d 35 (Fla. 3d DCA 2012)…ts but reserving jurisdiction to set the amount of the fees, we dismiss the appeal and cross-appeal of that issue in case number 3D12-2611 as a non-final determination not yet ripe for appellate review. E.g., Rhodes v. Newport Bldg. & Constr., Inc., 86 So. 3d 1245, 1247 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012) (“Because the order determines that [the appellee] is entitled to fees but does not determine the amount, it is a nonfinal order not yet ripe for appellate review.” (citing Allstate Ins. Co. v. Jenkins, 32 So. 3d 163, 165 (F…
-
United Servs. Auto. Ass'n v. Velez, 305 So. 3d 682 (Fla. 3d DCA 2020)…cating various reasons why this has not been accomplished. is entitled to fees but does not determine the amount, it is a nonfinal order not yet ripe for appellate review.” (alteration in original) (quoting Rhodes v. Newport Bldg. & Constr., Inc., 86 So. 3d 1245, 1247 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012))). Thus, we express no opinion as to the issues and arguments Velez raised on appeal related to his entitlement to attorney’s fees. IV. CONCLUSION For the reasons set forth above, we reverse and remand for the trial court…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Beach Resorts Int'l, Inc. v. Clarmac Marine Constr. Co., 339 So. 2d 689 (Fla. 2d DCA 1976)
- Allstate Ins. Co. v. Jenkins, 32 So. 3d 163 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010)