Florida District Courts of Appeal, 1984

Tietig v. Riccio

Florida District Courts of Appeal · Decided June 19, 1984 · Bark, Dull, Ferguson, Schwartz

451 So. 2d 1016; 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 13888 (Southern Reporter, Second Series)

Cases that cite this one

3 later published cases cite this decision.

SAAD Homes, Inc. v. Rivero (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2009)
Haws & Garrett v. Panhandle Custom Decorators (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1986)
Meka Construction Corp. v. Village Mall of Port Orange, Ltd. (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1985)

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.

Because plaintiffs suit seeks primarily foreclosure of a mechanic’s lien on real property, even though damages are sought as an alternative remedy, the action should have been brought in Brevard County where the property is situated. See Georgia Casualty Co. v. O’Donnell, 109 Fla. 290, 147 So. 267 (1933); Sales v. Berzin, 212 So.2d 23 (Fla. 4th DCA 1968) (a suit to foreclose mortgage is local, and must be brought in county where land lies, even though other relief, such as deficiency judgment, may be granted).

Reversed with instructions to transfer venue or dismiss.

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