RAFFA ASSOCIATES, INC., APPELLANT,
v.
BOCA RATON RESORT & CLUB, A FLORIDA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, BOBBY BRYANT AND JANICE BRYANT, HIS WIFE, BRAGA, BURTON, BRASWELL & ASSOCIATES, A FLORIDA CORPORATION, AND LEE & SAKAHARA ASSOCIATES AIA, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, APPELLEES
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.
Raffa Associates, a general contractor, appealed the trial court's denial of its motion to compel arbitration of an architect's third-party indemnity claim arising from an employee's personal injury. The court affirmed, holding that although the architect was a third-party beneficiary bound by the construction contract's arbitration clause, a specific contractual provision requiring written consent from all parties to include the architect in arbitration was not satisfied.
Although a third-party beneficiary of a contract is ordinarily bound by an arbitration clause, the specific contractual provision (section 4.5.5) requiring written consent from the architect, owner, contractor, and other parties to consolidate or join the architect in arbitration precluded compulsory arbitration of the architect's claim absent such signed consent.
[1] A third-party beneficiary of a contract containing an arbitration clause is ordinarily bound by that clause.
[2] A contract provision expressly excluding an architect from arbitration, absent written consent, overrides a general arbitration clause.
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“ordinarily a third-party beneficiary of a contract is bound by an arbitration clause in that contract”
Establishes the general rule that third-party beneficiaries are subject to arbitration provisions
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceBobby Bryant, employed by Raffa Associates as a general contractor, suffered personal injuries during demolition work on a construction project owned …
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 Motion To Compel Arbitration cases and more on FLexlaw
HERSEY, Judge.
This appeal arises from denial of a motion to stay litigation and to compel arbitration. We affirm.
Bobby Bryant suffered personal injuries while engaged in demolition work on a construction project. He was employed by appellant, Raffa Associates, Inc., the general contractor. Boca Raton Resort & Club was the owner of the premises and Lee & Sakahara Associates AIA, Inc., were the architects for the project.
In an attempt to recover damages for his personal injuries Bryant sued the owner and the architect on theories of negligence. Each of them filed third-party complaints bringing in Bryant’s employer, Raffa.
During the early stages of the litigation Raffa moved, under the provisions of the construction contract, for arbitration of these third-party claims. The trial court sent the owner’s claim against Raffa to arbitration, but denied the similar motion pertaining to the architect’s claim.
For purposes of argument, we accept appellant Raffa’s proffered legal position as to the status of the architect appel-lee and the facial consequences of that status; that is, the architect was a third-party beneficiary of the construction contract. Having accepted that status, we note that ordinarily a third-party beneficiary of a contract is bound by an arbitration clause in that contract. See Zac Smith & Co. v. Moonspinner Condominium Ass’n, 472 So. 2d 1324, 1325 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985) (citing 2 Williston on Contracts, § 364A (3d ed. 1959)). The Zac Smith court also explained that section 682.03, Florida Statutes (1983), which authorizes the filing of a motion to compel arbitration, extends to third-party beneficiaries to a contract containing an arbitration clause.
Raffa’s third-party complaint seeks both contract indemnity and common law indemnity from the architect. For present purposes we assume but do not decide that both are within the contemplation of the arbitration clause in the construction contract.
However, another provision in the contract, section 4.5.5, entitled Limitation of Consolidation or Joinder, reads in pertinent part:
No arbitration arising out of or relating to the Contract Documents shall include, by consolidation or joinder or in any other manner, the Architect, the Architect’s employees or consultants, except by written consent containing specific reference to the Agreement and signed by the Architect, Owner, Contractor and any other person or entity sought to be joined.
No such signed written consent exists. Thus, the arbitration sought to be compelled by Raffa of the architect’s third-party indemnity claim is unauthorized in the contract.
We take this lack of written consent as sufficiently forceful evidence of a purpose to exclude a claim from arbitration that otherwise would be encompassed by the broad sweep of the arbitration clause. See Beaver Coaches, Inc. v. Revels Nationwide R.V. Sales, Inc., 543 So. 2d 359, 362 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989). We consider the impact of section 4.5.5 of the contract here, although it was not specifically relied on below, on the authority of Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So. 2d 1150 (Fla.1979).
Accordingly, we affirm.
AFFIRMED.
STONE and FARMER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Terminix Int'l Co., LP v. Ponzio, 693 So. 2d 104 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997)…t. See Technicable Video Systems v. Americable of Greater Miami, Ltd., 479 So. 2d 810 (Fla. Sd DCA 1985). As third party beneficiaries, these additional plaintiffs are bound by the arbitration provision. See Raffa Assoc. v. Boca Raton Resort & Club, 616 So. 2d 1096 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993); Zac Smith & Co., Inc. v. Moonspinner Condominium Assoc., Inc. 472 So. 2d 1324 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985). We reverse the order denying Terminix’s motion to dismiss and remand with instructions that the claims be referred to arbitratio…
-
Mendez v. Hampton Court Nursing Ctr., LLC, 203 So. 3d 146 (Fla. 2016)…nd Fifth Districts held differently”). The Second, Fourth, and Fifth Districts all acknowledge that third-party beneficiaries can be bound by arbitration provisions. See Terminix, 693 So. 2d at 109 (citing Raffa Assocs. v. Boca Raton Resort & Club, 616 So. 2d 1096 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998); Zac Smith 472 So. 2d 1324). For example, the Fifth District has explained that “Florida courts have generally held that arbitration clauses in contracts may be enforced by and are binding on third party beneficiaries.” Hirshenso…
-
Martha A. Gottfried, Inc. v. Paulette Koch Real Est., Inc., 778 So. 2d 1089 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001)…s’n, 64 F. 3d 773, 776 (2d Cir.1995). Furthermore, a third party beneficiary to a contract can be compelled to arbitrate. See Terminix Int’l Co. LP v. Ponzio, 693 So. 2d 104 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997)(citing Raffa Assocs., Inc. v. Boca Raton Resort & Club, 616 So. 2d 1096 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993)); Zac Smith & Co., Inc. v. Moonspinner Condo. Ass’n, 472 So. 2d 1324 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985). Therefore, Gottfried, while not a signatory to Hoff-pauer’s application for membership with the Palm Beach Board of Realtors, is, neverthel…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Pitcher v. Schneider (Fla. 5th DCA 2018)
- Albert v. Applegate et ux., 377 So. 2d 1150 (Fla. 1979)
- Vance Lamar Larsen v. State, 543 So. 2d 359 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989)
- ZAC Smith & Co., Inc. v. Moonspinner Condo. Ass'n, Inc., 472 So. 2d 1324 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985)