G. A. CHAPMAN
v.
ST. STEPHENS PROTESTANT EPISCOPAL CHURCH, INC., AND THE TRUSTEES OF THE DIOCESE OF SOUTH FLORIDA
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.
G.A. Chapman, a contractor, appealed a decree dismissing his claim for an unpaid balance on a lien for labor and materials provided to repair a church. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the dismissal, holding that Chapman failed to meet his burden of proving that specific materials were furnished and labor was performed, and that such items remained unpaid.
The court held that Chapman failed to meet his burden of proof. The amount of a statutory lien must be definitely alleged and proved, and a lien can be enforced only for work actually covered thereby. Chapman was required to show by definite proof the specified materials furnished and definite labor performed, and that such items had not been paid for.
“Amount of statutory lien must be definitely alleged and proved and lien can be enforced only for work actually covered thereby.”
Establishes the legal standard that Chapman must prove the exact amount of the lien through definite evidence and that the lien covers only work actually performed or materials actually furnished.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceChapman, acting as a contractor, furnished labor and material for repairs and improvements to St. Stephens Protestant Episcopal Church. He was paid $1…
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 Lien Enforcement cases and more on FLexlaw
This case is now before, us on appeal from final decree in favor of the defendant in the court below. It is the final disposition of the case which was considered by us in Chapman v. St. Stephens Protestant Episcopal Church, Inc., et al., 105 Fla. 683, 136 So. 238; same, 105 Fla. 683, 138 So. 630, and same, 105 Fla. 683, 145 So. 757.
Numerous contentions are present by appellant. It is not necessary for us to discuss any of these questions as it appears from a consideration of the entire record that the decree of the chancellor, viz: “Based upon the pleadings and evidence in the cause, the court finds that the defendants are in nowise indebted to the plaintiff; whereupon,
“It is Ordered, Adjudged and Decreed that this cause be, and the same is hereby dismissed at the cost of the plaintiff,” upon authority of the opinion and judgment in the case of Thompson v. Wiles, 111 Fla. 513, 149 So. 769, wherein we held, “Amount of statutory lien must be definitely alleged and proved and lien can be enforced only for work actually covered thereby.”
The record in this case shows that the plaintiff, as a contractor, furnished labor and material for the repair and improvement of a church. That under the contract he was paid $10,850.00. He claimed a balance for which he sought to enforce this lien in the sum of $7,087.09.
The record shows definitely that his claim included many items of labor which were not performed find various items of material which were not furnished.
The burden was on the plaintiff to show definitely by proof that certain specified materials had been *643furnished for the construction under the alleged contract insofar as he sought to recover for materials furnished, and to show that he had furnished definite labor in the performance of the contract insofar as he sought to recover for such labor and, as to both, the burden was on the plaintiff to show that the material so furnished and labor so performed had not been paid for.
The plaintiff failed to meet this burden of proof.
No reversible error appearing in the record, the decree is affirmed.
It is so ordered.
BROWN, C. J., WHITFIELD, and ADAMS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Odom v. Barrett et ux., 67 So. 2d 200 (Fla. 1953)…en [*201] furnished and what work had been done under the contract and that it had not been paid for in the manner provided. This burden must be carried by the plaintiff if he is to recover. Chapman v. St. Stephens Protestant Episcopal Church, Inc., 151 Fla. 641, 10 So. 2d 324. This rule is particularly applicable in actions to enforce statutory liens. Thompson v. Wyles, 111 Fla. 513, 149 So. 769. Our examination of both records here (in the first and this appeal) leaves no doubt in our minds that the Chan…
Authorities Cited
- Chapman v. St. Stephens Protestant Episcopal, 105 Fla. 683 (Fla. 1931)
- In re Swope v. Equitable Life Assurance Soc'y of the United States, 104 Fla. 74 (Fla. 1932)
- State ex rel. John P. Nelson v. Dayton, 111 Fla. 202 (Fla. 1933)
- Reual W. Thompson v. Wyles, 111 Fla. 513 (Fla. 1933)