EDWARD L. NEZELEK, INC., AND THE TRAVELERS INDEMNITY COMPANY, APPELLANTS,
v.
CONCREFORM COMPANY, A FLORIDA CORPORATION, AND HIGHLAND BEACH AMBASSADORS, A FLORIDA CORPORATION, ET AL., APPELLEES; THE TRAVELERS INDEMNITY COMPANY, APPELLANTS, V. CONCREFORM COMPANY, A FLORIDA CORPORATION, AND HIGHLAND BEACH AMBASSADORS, A FLORIDA CORPORATION, ET AL., APPELLEES

Fla. 4th DCA | 1977-02-11
Nos. 76-528, 76-552
ALDERMAN and ANSTEAD, JJ., concur.
351 So. 2d 1046 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (1977) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases


Opinion of the Court
DAUKSCH, Judge.

DAUKSCH, Judge.

This is a mechanic’s lien case wherein the Appellee was granted a Final Judgment against the Appellant the effect of which foreclosed a lien which had been transferred pursuant to Section 713.24, Florida Statutes (1975). The Appellant was the surety insuror on the bond at the time the lien was alleged to have matured. At all material times herein there was in existence a payment bond exempting the owner and his surety, the Appellant, pursuant to Section 713.23, Florida Statutes (1975). The Appellee was aware of this payment bond but chose not to go against it as required by the Statute and therefore he should be barred from recovery under the transfer bond posted pursuant to Section 713.24, Florida Statutes (1975). Although the result may seem harsh, we hold under the applicable law and the facts of this case that Appellant has no cause of action against the Section 713.24, Florida Statutes (1975), transfer bond. See Resnick et al. v. Clerici, Fla.App., 340 So. 2d 1194, opinion issued. December 10, 1976.

This cause is REVERSED WITH DIRECTION to enter judgment for the Appellant.

ALDERMAN and ANSTEAD, JJ., concur.

Other

Upon rehearing our prior opinion in case 76-528 is withdrawn as it applies to Edward L, Nezelek, Inc., the contractor, and the Judgment below as pertains to that appellant is affirmed.

ALDERMAN and ANSTEAD, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • …Safeco. However, the law appears to be quite settled that the principal and surety on a Section 713.24 transfer bond are not liable thereon where there is a proper Section 713.23 payment bond in existence. Edward L. Nezelek, Inc. v. Concreform Co., 351 So. 2d 1046 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977). Resnick Developers South, Inc., supra ; Alpha Electric Supply Inc., supra. Thus, it would appear appropriate upon re [*741] mand to provide that the parties take nothing from Safeco as a result of the 713.24 transfer bond. In v…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw