ROBERT C. GINDEL
v.
CENTEX HOMES

Fla. 4th DCA | 2018-09-12
No. 17-2149
267 So. 3d 403 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (2018)
Cited by 2 cases

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.

Synopsis

# Legal Brief **Gindel v. Centex Homes**: A homeowner's provision of pre-suit notice of construction defects pursuant to Florida Statutes Chapter 558 constitutes commencement of an action for purposes of the ten-year statute of repose under § 95.11(3)(c), thereby tolling the repose period even though formal litigation was filed after the statutory deadline.


Headnotes

[1] Compliance with the notice requirement under section 558.004(1), Florida Statutes, does not commence a civil action or proceeding sufficient to toll the statute of repose…

[2] A question may be certified to the Florida Supreme Court as one of great public importance when reasonable people may differ on the interpretation of applicable Florida S…

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

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.


Opinion of the Court

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

ROBERT GINDEL, KEVIN HUMPHREY, XIOADAN SONG, WEIJING LI, PATRICIA JACOBS, CRAIG HANDWRECKER, JOHN WOODS, MICHELLE CHARBONNEAU, ANNIE BROUSSEAU, CLAUDE RACINE, ROLAND SKERGET, ANNE SMART, ANTHONY D’ACUNTO, GREGG LUTZ, ERIC NEMETH, JUDITH GRASSO, LORI BRYAN, BRIAN STREICHER, AND GRACE MACKEY,

Appellants,

v.

CENTEX HOMES, CENTEX REAL ESTATE CORPORATION, 2728 HOLDING CORPORATION, PULTE HOME CORPORATION, AND PULTE CORPORATION,

Appellees.

No. 4D17-2149

[ April 3, 2019 ]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit; Palm Beach County, Edward L. Artau, Judge; L.T. Case No. 50-2014-CA- 005369.

Scott C. Harris of Whitfield Bryson & Mason, LLP, Raleigh, NC, for appellants.

Luis E. Ordonez and Gabriel A. Alfonso of Quintairos, Prieto, Wood & Boyer, P.A., Miami, John H. Dannecker, Derrick M. Valkenburg, and Jennifer P. Sommerville of Shutts & Bowen, LLP, Orlando, and Jason B. Gonzalez of Shutts & Bowen, LLP, Tallahassee, for appellees.

On Motion for Certification PER CURIAM. Appellees request this Court to certify that its decision is in direct conflict with a decision of another district court of appeal, and/or that the decision passes upon a question of great public importance. Pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.030(a)(2)(A)(v), we grant the motion for certification. Because reasonable people may differ on the

2

interpretation of applicable Florida Supreme Court precedent as it applies to the interpretation of sections 95.11(3)(c) and 558.004, Florida Statutes (2014), we certify the following question to the Florida Supreme Court as one of great public importance:

DOES COMPLIANCE WITH THE NOTICE REQUIREMENT UNDER SECTION 558.004(1), FLORIDA STATUTES (2014) CONSTITUTE THE COMMENCEMENT OF A CIVIL ACTION OR PROCEEDING SUFFICIENT TO TOLL THE STATUTE OF REPOSE SET FORTH IN SECTION 95.11(3)(C), FLORIDA STATUTES (2014)? FERNANDEZ and SCALES, Associate Judges, and SUAREZ, Senior Associate Judge, concur.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw