Blazer Construction Industries, Inc. v. Fidelity & Guaranty Insurance Co.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Blazer Construction Industries, Inc. v. Fidelity & Guaranty Insurance Co.

616 So. 2d 622, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 4176, 1993 WL 113416

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedApril 14, 1993

DocketNos. 92-1892, 92-2671

StatusPublished

This text of 616 So. 2d 622 (Blazer Construction Industries, Inc. v. Fidelity & Guaranty Insurance Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Blazer Construction Industries, Inc. v. Fidelity & Guaranty Insurance Co., 616 So. 2d 622, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 4176, 1993 WL 113416 (Fla. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Reversed and remanded for a new trial. We agree with appellant that the trial court erred in entering an involuntary dismissal at the end of appellant’s case in this bench trial. The appellant presented evidence demonstrating its entitlement to recovery against appellee under section 255.05, Florida Statutes (1991), either as a claimant on its own behalf, or as an assignee of another. For example, appellant presented evidence that it acted in direct privity with the general contractor throughout the term of the project. Under these circumstances appellant is entitled to a judicial resolution of its claim on the merits.

GLICKSTEIN, C.J., ANSTEAD, J„ and OWEN, WILLIAM C., Jr., Senior Judge, concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

Reversed and remanded for a new trial. We agree with appellant that the trial court erred in entering an involuntary dismissal at the end of appellant’s case in this bench trial. The appellant presented evidence demonstrating its entitlement to recovery against appellee under section 255.05, Florida Statutes (1991), either as a claimant on its own behalf, or as an assignee of another. For example, appellant presented evidence that it acted in direct privity with the general contractor throughout the term of the project. Under these circumstances appellant is entitled to a judicial resolution of its claim on the merits.

GLICKSTEIN, C.J., ANSTEAD, J„ and OWEN, WILLIAM C., Jr., Senior Judge, concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

616 So. 2d 622, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 4176, 1993 WL 113416, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/blazer-construction-industries-inc-v-fidelity-guaranty-insurance-co-fladistctapp-1993.