Florida Construction Law

"A contractor faced with a substantial change in its originally contracted scope of work, who is unable to successfully negotiate a price for that additional work, may elect to continue to work and reserve its right to subsequently obtain a judicial determination as to the value of the changes, so long as the other contracting party continues to demand performance of the increased scope of work, and in the absence of any conflicting provision of the contract."   Ted Jacob Engineering Group v. Ratcliff Architects ,  2010 WL 3294341 (Cal.App. 1 Dist.). Trenton H. Cotney Florida Bar Certified in Construction Law Glenn Rasmussen Fogarty & Hooker, P.A. 100 S. Ashley Dr., Suite 1300 Tampa, FL 33602 (813) 229-3333 www.trentcotney.com

In Sam Rodgers Properties, Inc. v. Chmura , 2011 WL 1565446 (Fla. 2d DCA 2011), a home builder sued the purchaser for breach of contract and lien foreclosure.  The Court issued several useful holdings.  First, the fact that there was no meeting of the minds with regard to extra work performed does not invalidate the original executed contract.  Second, additional work performed by the home builder to secure the property which included finishing the roof system acted to extend the “last day of work” for purposes of calculating the 90 days to record the claim of lien.  Third, the home builder could not include amounts spent on insurance or property taxes for the constructed property in its claim of lien.  However, the inclusion of those amounts did not render the lien invalid. Finally, the Court held that the filing of an erroneous amended claim of lien did not render the initial claim of lien unenforceable. Trenton H. Cotney Board Certified in Constr...

A claim for unjust enrichment may be brought against a contractor or owner as an equitable claim to address unexecuted change orders.  As the Court stated in Della Ratta v. Della Ratta , 927 So.2d 1055 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006), "t o state a claim for unjust enrichment, a plaintiff must plead the following elements:   1) the plaintiff has conferred a benefit on the defendant;   2) the defendant has knowledge of the benefit;   3) the defendant has accepted or retained the benefit conferred;   and 4) the circumstances are such that it would be inequitable for the defendant to retain the benefit without paying fair value for it."   Trenton H. Cotney Florida Bar Certified in Construction Law Glenn Rasmussen Fogarty & Hooker, P.A. 100 S. Ashley Dr., Suite 1300 Tampa, FL 33602 (813) 229-3333 http://www.glennrasmussen.com