HANEY CHEVROLET, INC., APPELLANT,
v.
POLI BROS., 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 trial court properly upheld the appellee's timely-filed mechanic's lien and correctly valued the lien based on reasonable value of labor and services furnished, including overhead, profit, and equipment rentals.
A mechanic's lien is properly valued by considering actual costs of work and materials, overhead, profit, wages, and equipment rentals, which become lienable when included in the contract price or reflected in reasonable value of services furnished.
[1] In valuing a mechanic's lien for labor and services furnished under a terminated contract, the trial court may consider actual costs of work and materials, overhead, prof…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceHaney Chevrolet and Poli Bros. had a contract for work and labor; the contract was terminated without fault of the materialman or contractor, and Poli…
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 Contract Termination cases and more on FLexlaw
We are of the opinion that the record supports the trial court’s findings of fact that appellee’s lien was timely filed. Additionally we are of the view that the trial court was not in error in its determination as to the reasonable value of appel-lee’s lien for labor and services furnished appellant.
In estimating the reasonable value of work and labor actually furnished (where the contract has been terminated without fault of the materialman or contractor) such factors as the actual cost of work done and materials supplied, including the overhead and profit, wages paid to employees performing the labor supervision and rentals of equipment furnished in the improvement, may be considered. 53 Am. Jur.2d Mechanics’ Liens §§ 103-107, 245; see also Rebisso, Inc. v. Frick, 1953, 159 Ohio St. 449, 112 N.E.2d 651; cf. Surf Properties v. Markowitz Bros., Fla.1954, 75 So.2d 298. Such items, as separate items, are nonlienable but become lienable when they are included in a contract price or reflected in the reasonable value of labor or materials furnished.
The trial court was not in error in considering the foregoing factors in determining the reasonable value of labor performed or materials furnished.
Affirmed.
REED, C. J., and OWEN, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Sprinkler Fitters & Apprentices Local Union NO. 821 v. F.I.T.R. Serv. Corp., 461 So. 2d 144 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984)…n. Similarly, cases holding that a materialman’s overhead and profit are lienable provided these items are included in the contract price or are reflected in the reasonable value of materials furnished, see Haney Chevrolet, Inc. v. Poli Bros., Inc., 262 So. 2d 230, 231 (Fla. 4th DCA 1972); accord, Surf Properties, Inc. v. Markowitz Bros., 75 So. 2d 298 (Fla.1954); Broderick v. Overhead Door Co., 117 So. 2d 240, although distinguishable on the ground that the materialman’s earnings, unlike the laborer’s, depen…
Authorities Cited
- Surf Props., Inc. v. Markowitz Bros., Inc., 75 So. 2d 298 (Fla. 1954)