ROBERT M. STOCKSLAGER AND MYRTLE R. STOCKSLAGER, HIS WIFE, PETITIONERS,
v.
DALY ALUMINUM PRODUCTS, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, RESPONDENTS
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 Florida Supreme Court held that when a deadline under the Mechanic's Lien Law falls on Sunday, the deadline is extended to the next business day. The Court declined to require performance of procedural acts on Sunday when the statute is silent on time computation, harmonizing the Mechanic's Lien Law with general rules of statutory construction regarding time periods.
The Court held that the notice of lien was timely. When a statutory deadline under the Mechanic's Lien Law falls on Sunday and the statute is silent on time computation, the deadline is extended to the next day. The Court declined to require parties to perform procedural acts on Sunday in the absence of clear statutory mandate.
[1] Notice provided for in a statute is not effective until received.
[2] When the last day for filing a notice falls on a Sunday, the notice is timely if filed on the following day.
Previewing 2 of 5 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“absent a clear statutory mandate dictating a different result, we decline to ascribe to the Legislature an intent to require a party to perform an impossible act.”
Establishes the core holding that statutory deadlines falling on Sunday or holidays are implicitly extended in the absence of explicit contrary language.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe Stockslagers filed a notice of lien under Florida's Mechanic's Lien Law. The 45th day prescribed by statute for filing the notice fell on a Sunday…
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 Notice Period cases and more on FLexlaw
This cause is before us on petition for writ of certiorari to review a decision of the Second District Court of Appeal entered December 11, 1970, 244 So.2d 528, wherein the District Court stated:
“This particular provision of the Mechanic’s Lien Law has never been construed in Florida. We believe that notice as provided for in the statute cannot be effective until received. However, since the last day, the forty-fifth day as prescribed in the statute, fell on Sunday we further hold that the receipt of notice was timely since it was received on the forty-sixth day, the forty-fifth day being on Sunday. We arrived at this conclusion by comparing FRCP 1.090(a), 30 F.S.A. and F.A.R. 3.18, 32 F.S.A. While we recognize the Mechanic’s Lien Law statute is silent in this regard it makes sense that the same construction be placed upon the statute as is laid down in the rules.”
This result is alleged to be in conflict with our decision in In re McRae’s Estate, 73 So.2d 818 (Fla.1954), wherein we held the provisions of the Common Law and Equity Rules then in effect relative to computations of time inapplicable to the statute prescribing procedure for appeal from the County Judge’s Court. The result in McRae was that appellant, 'Jsho had filed her notice of appeal on a Monday and on the thirty-first day after entry of the challenged order, had filed an untimely appeal. Although Rule 5.050(h), PGR, effectively supersedes our decision in McRae, we take this opportunity to recede from the rationale of that case insofar as it relates to computations of time, and to expressly approve the rationale of the District Court in the instant case.
In Dade County Planning Department v. Ransing, 158 So.2d 528, (Fla.1963), involving timeliness of an application for review filed with the Industrial Relations Commission on the 21st day after the entry of the order of the Deputy, where the 20th day fell on a Sunday, we said, “* * * as a matter of construction and obviation of confusiqn the computations should be the same * * * an interpretation harmonizing the procedures will redound to clarification and simplification. * * * ” We held the appeal timely and directed the Full Commission to entertain the cause upon its merits.
*98To our statement in that case only one comment need be added: the rule established therein has the additional benefit of recognizing the impossibility of performing most procedural acts set up by statute on a Sunday or holiday. Accordingly, absent a clear statutory mandate dictating a different result, we decline to ascribe to the Legislature an intent to require a party to perform an impossible act.
The Mechanics’ Lien Act is silent on the question of computations of time. Therefore, we agree with District Court that since the last day on which respondent’s notice of lien could have been filed fell on a Sunday, the notice filed on the following day was timely.
Certiorari denied.
ROBERTS, C. J., and ERVIN, CARLTON and DEKLE, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (11 total)
-
Rite-Way Painting & Plastering, Inc. v. Williard Tetor and Velma Tetor, 582 So. 2d 15 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991)…ot a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday. This court has previously applied rule 1.090 to compute the period for service of a notice of mechanic’s lien. See Daly Aluminum Products, Inc. v. Stockslager, 244 So. 2d 528 (Fla. 2d DCA 1970), cert. denied, 246 So. 2d 97 (Fla.1971). Here, because December 31st was a Saturday and January 2nd was the New Year’s Day holiday, the last day for proper service was Tuesday, January 3, 1989. Finding that Rite-Way’s notice to owner was timely served, we reverse the final jud…
-
Stunkel v. Gazebo Landscaping Design, Inc., 660 So. 2d 623 (Fla. 1995)…king crane several months later), review denied, 525 So. 2d 878 (Fla.1988); Daly Aluminum Prods., Inc. v. Stockslager, 244 So. 2d 528, 529 (Fla. 2d DCA 1970) (counting forty-five-day period from the day improvements began at the site), cert. denied, 246 So. 2d 97 (Fla.1971); see also 1 Stephen Rakusin, Florida Construction Lien Manual, Ch. 8.04F.1.b.(1) (1994) (“[T]he general rule is that the time period is computed from the first day on which the claimant delivers material or labors on the job.”). The Arli…
-
Herrero v. The Black & Decker Mfg. Co., 275 So. 2d 54 (Fla. 3d DCA 1973)…the period is extended and the action may be commenced on the following secular or business day. See 86 C.J.S. Time § 14(9) (1954) and cases cited therein. We also are guided in our decision by Stockslager v. Daly Aluminum Products, Inc., Fla.1971, 246 So. 2d 97 which is analogous to the case sub judice. In Daly, the Florida Supreme Court held that where the last day on which notice of a mechanic’s lien could have been filed fell on a Sunday, the notice filed on the following day was timely. Further, we ar…
Previewing 3 of 11 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Daly Aluminum Prods., Inc. v. Stockslager, 244 So. 2d 528 (Fla. 2d DCA 1970)
- Dade Cnty. Planning Dep't & Bituminous Cas. Corp. v. Ransing, 158 So. 2d 528 (Fla. 1963)
- In re McRAE'S Estate, 73 So. 2d 818 (Fla. 1954)