HAROLD SAMHAT AND RELIANCE INSURANCE COMPANY, APPELLANTS,
v.
COCOA MASONRY OF PINELLAS COUNTY, INC., AND HARCAR ALUMINUM PRODUCTS COMPANY, APPELLEES; HAROLD SAMHAT AND RELIANCE INSURANCE COMPANY, APPELLANTS, V. DELTA AIR CONDITIONING & SHEET METAL, INC., APPELLEE; HAROLD SAMHAT, APPELLANT, V. COCOA MASONRY OF PINELLAS COUNTY, INC., APPELLEE; HAROLD SAMHAT AND RELIANCE INSURANCE COMPANY, APPELLANTS, V. FLORIDA FOREST PRODUCTS, INC., APPELLEE; HAROLD SAMHAT, APPELLANT, V. FLORIDA FOREST PRODUCTS, 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.
Property owner Samhat and surety Reliance Insurance were liable on mechanic's lien claims brought by subcontractors, but the judgment against Samhat personally on the lien foreclosure claim was reversed because a transfer bond released him from personal liability.
A property owner has no personal liability on a mechanic's lien foreclosure claim when his only connection to the lien is property ownership and the lien has been transferred to a bond.
[1] A property owner has no personal liability on a mechanic's lien foreclosure claim when his only connection to the lien is property ownership and the lien has been transfe…
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 intelligence“An individual has no personal liability if his only link to a mechanic's lien action is his ownership of the property.”
Court explaining the legal principle that property ownership alone does not create personal liability in mechanic's lien actions.
Samhat owned real property on which condominium units were constructed. Subcontractors, including Cocoa Masonry, filed mechanic's lien claims. Samhat …
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 Transfer Bond cases and more on FLexlaw
PATTERSON, Judge.
Harold Samhat, the real property owner, and Reliance Insurance Company, the surety, appeal from final judgments entered in favor of subcontractors Cocoa Masonry of Pinellas County, Inc., Delta Air-Conditioning and Sheet Metal, Inc., Florida Forest Products, Inc., and Harcar Aluminum Products Company in this consolidated action arising from the construction of condominium units on Samhat’s property. We have considered all the points that the appellants have raised, and we affirm the judgments against the appellants in all respects except one.
In Cocoa Masonry’s action against Samhat and Reliance Insurance Company, it filed a four-count amended complaint. The form of the final judgment reflects that the trial court granted relief to Cocoa Masonry on count I, its claim for a mechanic’s lien foreclosure. Although Samhat transferred the lien to a bond, the final judgment in favor of Cocoa Masonry was entered against Samhat personally as well as against the surety. An individual has no personal liability if his only link to a mechanic’s lien action is his ownership of the property. Further, the transfer bond releases the property from the lien. See International Community Corporation-Tampa v. Davis Water and Waste Industries, Inc., 455 So. 2d 1164, 1165 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984) (bond released property owner from liability). Thus, the judgment in favor of Cocoa Masonry must be vacated as to Samhat.
Affirmed in part, reversed in part.
DANAHY, A.C.J., and ALTENBERND, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Samhat v. Curtis F. Griffin, Jr., Inc., 577 So. 2d 710 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991)…tor, Curtis F. Griffin, Jr., Inc. Of the five points raised by appellants, we find merit only in their contention that the trial court erred in ruling that Samhat is personally liable to Griffin. See Samhat v. Cocoa Masonry of Pinellas County, Inc., 567 So. 2d 450, 451 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990). We find no merit in the cross-appeal. Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded for the vacating of the judgment as to Samhat personally. RYDER, A.C.J., and LEHAN and FRANK, JJ., concur.…
Authorities Cited
- Asiner v. Oriole Homes Corp., 455 So. 2d 1164 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984)
- Int'l Cmty. Corporation-Tampa & the Ins. Co. of Fla. v. Davis Water & Waste Indus., Inc., 455 So. 2d 1164 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984)