ASTALDI CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION, APPELLANT,
v.
AMERICAN ASPHALT, INC., APPELLEE

Fla. 5th DCA | 1996-04-26
No. 95-1396
W. SHARP, and THOMPSON, JJ., concur.
672 So. 2d 609 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fifth District (1996) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

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.

Synopsis

Astaldi Construction Corporation appealed a judgment in a contract dispute with American Asphalt over unpaid subcontracting fees. The court held that under Florida Statutes § 255.071, a trial court can only enter judgment on undisputed amounts in a summary hearing for unpaid construction work on public projects, and disputed amounts must proceed through normal litigation.


Holding

The trial court can only enter judgment on the undisputed amount in the summary hearing provided by § 255.071. As to disputed amounts, the case must proceed as any other contract lawsuit with discovery, pretrial proceedings, and trial before final judgment can be rendered on those amounts.


Headnotes

[1] A trial court may only enter judgment on the undisputed amount due to a subcontractor or materialman in a public project contract dispute.

[2] Disputed amounts in a public project contract dispute must proceed through standard discovery, pretrial proceedings, and trial before a final judgment can be rendered.

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

Key Quotes

“The remedies specified in subsection (4) must be granted without regard to any other remedy at law and without regard to whether or not irreparable damage has occurred or will occur.”

Establishes the mandatory nature of remedies for undisputed amounts under the statute.

Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

Astaldi was the contractor with the Orange County Expressway Authority to build a portion of a roadway and subcontracted with American Asphalt to prov…

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.


Opinion of the Court
DAUKSCH, Judge.

DAUKSCH, Judge.

This is an appeal from a judgment in a contract dispute between a contractor and a subcontractor and materialman.

Astaldi was the contractor with the Orange County Expressway Authority to build a portion of a roadway. Astaldi subcontracted with American Asphalt to provide material and labor. At the completion of the job Astaldi did not pay American all it was due so American sued to get its due.

Sections 255.071(3)(4) and (5), Florida Statutes (1995) provide:

255.071 Payment of subcontractors, sub-subcontractors, materialmen, and suppliers on construction contracts for public projects.—

* * * * *

(3) Any person providing labor, services, or materials for the construction of a public building, for the prosecution and completion of a public work, or for repairs upon a public braiding or public work improvements to real property may file a verified complaint alleging:

(a) The existence of a contract for providing such labor, services, or materials to improve real property.

(b) A description of the labor, services, or materials provided and alleging that the labor, services, or materials were provided in accordance with the contract.

(c) The amount of the contract price.

(d) The amount, if any, paid pursuant to the contract.

(e) The amount that remains unpaid pursuant to the contract and the amount thereof that is undisputed.

(f) That the undisputed amount has remained due and payable pursuant to the contract for more than 30 days after the date the labor or services were accepted or the materials were received.

(g) That the person against whom the complaint was filed has received payment on account of the labor, services, or materials described in the complaint more than 30 days prior to the date the complaint was filed.

(4) After service of the complaint, the court shall conduct an evidentiary hearing on the complaint, upon not less than 15 days’ written notice. The person providing labor, services, or materials is entitled to the following remedies to the extent of the undisputed amount due for labor or services performed or materials supplied, and upon proof of each allegation in the complaint:

(a) An accounting of the use of any such payment from the person who received such payment.

(b) A temporary injunction against the person who received the payment, subject to the bond requirements specified in the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure.

(c) Prejudgment attachment against the person who received the payment, in accordance with each of the requirements of chapter 76. <d) Such other legal or equitable remedies as may be appropriate in accordance with the requirements of the law.

(5) The remedies specified in subsection (4) must be granted without regard to any other remedy at law and without regard to whether or not irreparable damage has occurred or will occur. The parties appeared before the trial court and these statutory provisions were invoked. Appellant conceded a portion of the alleged debt was owed and disputed the remainder. The question on appeal, which appellant says is one of first impression, is whether the trial judge has the authority, at this summary hearing, to determine disputed amounts. We hold that a clear reading of the statute, in addition to due process considerations, impel a ruling that the trial court can only enter judgment on the undisputed amount. As to the disputed amounts the case must proceed as any other contract lawsuit, with discovery, other pretrial proceedings and trial. Only after trial on the disputed amounts may final judgment be fairly rendered as to those amounts.

REVERSED.

W. SHARP, and THOMPSON, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Fence Masters, Inc. v. Zurqui Constr. Serv., Inc., 836 So. 2d 1088 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003)
    …may make a $20,000 ± claim for "defective work.” . The trial court can only enter judgment on the undisputed amount. As to the disputed amounts the case must proceed as any other contract lawsuit. See Astaldi Const. Corp. v. American Asphalt, Inc., 672 So. 2d 609 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996).…

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw