Florida District Courts of Appeal, 1971

Yell-For-Pennell, Inc. v. Joab, Inc.

Florida District Courts of Appeal · Decided January 26, 1971 · Bark, Carroll, Dull, Swann

243 So. 2d 438; 1971 Fla. App. LEXIS 5412 (Southern Reporter, Second Series)

Cases that cite this one

4 later published cases cite this decision.

MID-STATE CONTRACTPRS, INC. v. Halo Development Corp. (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1977)
Centex-Winston Corp. v. CROWN PAINT (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1974)
Adobe Brick and Supply Co. v. Centex-Winston Corp. (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1972)
Approved Dry Wall Construction, Inc. v. Morgan Properties, Inc. (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1972)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

This appeal is from an order which held that the plaintiff, Yell-For-Pennell, Inc., had not complied with the provisions of the Florida Mechanics Lien Act and that the defendant, Joab, Inc., was not liable to the plaintiff. Final judgment was rendered for Joab, Inc. and plaintiff has appealed.

The notice to the owner herein must be held sufficient. See § 713.06(2), Fla.Stat., F.S.A.; and Boux v. East Hillsborough Apartments, Inc., Fla.App.1969, 218 So.2d 202.

The claim of lien was substantially in the form prescribed by the act and there was no showing that the landowner was prejudiced by the form of the claim. See § 713.08(3) and (4), Fla.Stat., F.S.A.; George J. Motz Construction Corp. v. Coral Pines, Inc., Fla.App. 1970, 232 So.2d 441; and Russell v. Farrey’s Wholesale Hardware Co., Fla.App.1964, 163 So.2d 513.

Accordingly, the final judgment for defendant is reversed and the cause is remanded for further action consistent herewith.

It is so ordered.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.