COPLAN PIPE & SUPPLY CO., INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, APPELLANT,
v.
ALTON TOWERS, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, AND FIDELITY & DEPOSIT COMPANY OF MARYLAND, 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.
Coplan Pipe & Supply Co., a materialman supplier to a plumbing subcontractor, sought to enforce a mechanics lien against bond proceeds after the subcontractor defaulted. The court reversed the trial court's denial of the lien claim, holding that a materialman with proper notice is entitled to recover against the owner despite the owner's offset theory based on costs to complete the abandoned subcontract work.
A materialman who supplies materials to a subcontractor and provides required notice of intention to claim lien and timely files lien notice is entitled to be paid by the owner and may enforce the lien regardless of the owner's offset theory based on completion costs. The offset theory does not apply in cases of subcontractor abandonment or default with respect to materialmen claims.
[1] A materialman who supplies materials to a subcontractor and gives timely notice of intention to claim a lien and files a timely lien notice is entitled to be paid by the…
[2] An owner's right to offset the cost of completing a subcontractor's work against unpaid subcontract amounts does not apply to claims of materialmen of that subcontractor.
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“Such a materialman, who has given the required notice of intention to claim lien and has timely filed lien notice is entitled to be paid by the owner and may enforce his lien.”
Establishes the core holding that properly noticed materialmen have statutory rights to recover from the owner regardless of subcontractor default.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceCoplan Pipe & Supply supplied materials to Dade Plumbing, Inc., the plumbing subcontractor on a 29-unit apartment building project owned by Alton Towe…
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 Materialman'S Lien cases and more on FLexlaw
ON REHEARING GRANTED
On consideration of this cause upon rehearing, after further argument, this court’s order of affirmance filed April 20, 1971, is withdrawn and this opinion reversing the judgment appealed from is hereby substituted and made the judgment of this court.
The appellant Copian Pipe & Supply Co., Inc. was a materialman which supplied materials to Dade Plumbing, Inc., the plumbing subcontractor on a 29-unit apartment building construction job of which the owner of the property, the appellee Alton Towers, Inc. was the general contractor for the construction job. During the progress of the work Dade Plumbing, Inc. defaulted and abandoned its subcontract. Prior thereto the appellant had delivered to Dade Plumbing, Inc. materials used in the construction for which there was due to appellant from Dade Plumbing, Inc. $4,-512.90. The plumbing subcontract was for $48,375. At the time the subcontractor abandoned the work there remained unpaid thereon the sum of $9,485.82. The contractor was required to expend more than that sum to complete the Dade Plumbing subcontract work.
Appellant, as a materialman to the subcontractor, served timely notice on the owner of intention to claim lien, as provided for in § 713.06(3) (a), and thereafter timely filed notice of lien.
In this action by the appellant to foreclose his lien, against the proceeds of a bond which had been substituted for the property against which the lien was filed, the trial court denied recovery, and the materialman appealed.
*526The theory advanced by the appellee-owner in support of the judgment is that the owner was entitled to offset, against the amount of $9,485.82 which had remained unpaid on the plumbing subcontract, the cost of completing such subcontract, and therefore there was no remaining fund out of which the appellant-materi-alman was entitled to be paid. That theory is inapplicable to this situation. Assuming, but without need to so decide, that the above theory may apply in the instance of a default or abandonment by a general contractor (see Bryan v. Owsley Lumber Company, Fla.App.1967, 201 So.2d 246), it does not have application in the case of the abandonment or default by a subcontractor, with reference to claims of materialmen of the subcontractor. Such a materialman, who has given the required notice of intention to claim lien and has timely filed lien notice is entitled to be paid by the owner and may enforce his lien. § 713.06 Fla. Stat., F.S.A. Melnick v. Reynold’s Metals Company, Fla.App. 1970, 230 So.2d 490. Cf. Crane Co. v. Fine, Fla.1969, 221 So.2d 145.
The judgment is reversed and the cause is remanded for further proceedings.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Alton Towers, Inc. v. Coplan Pipe & Supply Co., Inc., 262 So. 2d 671 (Fla. 1972)…BOYD, Justice. This cause is before us on petition for writ of certiorari to review the decision of the District Court of Appeal, Third District, reported at 249 So. 2d 525. Our jurisdiction is based on conflict between the decision sought to be reviewed and Bryan v. Owsley Lumber Company, 201 So. 2d 246 (Fla.App.1st 1967). Alton Towers, petitioner herein, is the owner of certain property and the builder of a multi-st…1 / 2
Authorities Cited
- Crane Co. v. Fine, 221 So. 2d 145 (Fla. 1969)
- The Fid. & Cas. Co. OF NEW York v. Servan Land Co., Inc., 201 So. 2d 246 (Fla. 4th DCA 1967)
- E. G. Layton Constr. Co. v. Kalin, 230 So. 2d 490 (Fla. 1st DCA 1970)