CURRY & SONS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, INC., CHARLES P. CURRY, JR., ELIZABETH A. CURRY, ET AL., APPELLANTS,
v.
MCKILLIP CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, 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.
Curry & Sons Development Corporation appealed a trial court order denying arbitration of a construction dispute. The court reversed, holding that a common law damages claim arising from a construction contract containing an arbitration agreement must be arbitrated despite the prior dismissal of a lien foreclosure count.
The court held that the order denying arbitration was erroneous and must be reversed. The common law damages claim was clearly covered by the agreement to arbitrate, and arbitration should be permitted in accordance with that agreement despite the dismissal of the lien foreclosure count.
[1] An order denying arbitration is immediately appealable.
[2] A claim for damages arising from a construction project is subject to arbitration if the arbitration agreement covers claims arising out of or related to the contract.
Previewing 2 of 4 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“Any controversy or Claim arising out of or related to the Contract, or the breach thereof, shall be settled by arbitration in accordance with the Construction Industry Arbitration Rules of the American Arbitration Association”
Establishes the broad scope of the arbitration agreement in the construction contract, covering claims arising out of or related to the contract
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAppellants Curry & Sons Development Corporation and related parties were defendants in a construction dispute involving McKillip Construction Company.…
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 Arbitration Clause Construction cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The appellants, defendants in the trial court, appeal pursuant to Rule 9.130(a)(3)(C)(v), Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure, an order of the trial court denying arbitration of a claim arising out of a construction project. The trial court denied arbitration because the defendants had been successful in causing a count for foreclosure of a lien to be dismissed. All that remained was a common law count for damages, which was clearly a claim covered by the agreement to arbitrate.1 See Manalili v. Commercial Mowing & Grading, 442 So. 2d 411 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983); Vic Potamkin Chevrolet, Inc. v. Bloom, 386 So. 2d 286 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980). Therefore, the order under review is reversed with directions to permit arbitration in accordance with the agreement.
Reversed and remanded with directions.
. 4.5 ARBITRATION
4.5.1 Controversies and Claims Subject to Arbitration. Any controversy or Claim arising out of or related to the Contract, or the breach thereof, shall be settled by arbitration in accordance with the Construction Industry Arbitration Rules of the American Arbitration Association, and judgment upon the award rendered by the arbitrator or arbitrators may be entered in any court having jurisdiction thereof, except controversies or Claims relating to aesthetic effect and except those waived as provided for in Subpara-graph 4.3.5. Such controversies for Claims upon which the Architect has given notice and rendered a decision as provided in Subpara-graph 4.4.4 shall be subject to arbitration upon written demand of either party. Arbitration may be commenced when 45 days have passed after a Claim has been referred to the Architect as provided in Paragraph 4.3 and no decision has been rendered.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- VIC Potamkin Chevrolet, Inc. v. Bloom, 386 So. 2d 286 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980)
- Simeon Manalili v. Commercial Mowing AND Grading, 442 So. 2d 411 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983)