CAP Construction, Inc. v. TGSV Construction, Inc.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

CAP Construction, Inc. v. TGSV Construction, Inc.

698 So. 2d 1299, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 9698, 1997 WL 525599

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedAugust 27, 1997

DocketNo. 96-3240

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 698 So. 2d 1299 (CAP Construction, Inc. v. TGSV Construction, Inc.) 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

CAP Construction, Inc. v. TGSV Construction, Inc., 698 So. 2d 1299, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 9698, 1997 WL 525599 (Fla. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

SCHWARTZ, Chief Judge.

In the course of an arbitration of various disputes between the appellant subcontractor and the appellees, the general contractor and its surety, arising from work on a project in Dade County, the arbitrators, for procedural reasons, declined to consider or rule upon certain claims of the general against the sub, relegating them to a subsequent, separate arbitration. On this appeal, the sub challenges an order which stayed confirmation of an award in its favor rendered in the “first” arbitration pending the results of the second one. In our view, however, the order was, at the least, an appropriate exercise of the trial court’s discretion, see NEC Electronics, Inc. v. VG Sales Co., 655 So.2d 1146 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995); Air Conditioning Equip. Inc. v. Rogers, 551 So.2d 554 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989); see also Ehrhart v. Raymond James & Assocs., 536 So.2d 1178 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989), and — although we need not directly so hold— may even have been required as a matter of law. See Martinez v. Marin, — So.2d -, 1997. WL 620202 (Fla. 3d DCA Case no. 96-3219, opinion filed, July 30, 1997)[22 FLW D1847](holding that final judgment may not be formally entered on complaint alone, but must await adjudication of defenses and counterclaim).

Affirmed.

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

SCHWARTZ, Chief Judge.

In the course of an arbitration of various disputes between the appellant subcontractor and the appellees, the general contractor and its surety, arising from work on a project in Dade County, the arbitrators, for procedural reasons, declined to consider or rule upon certain claims of the general against the sub, relegating them to a subsequent, separate arbitration. On this appeal, the sub challenges an order which stayed confirmation of an award in its favor rendered in the “first” arbitration pending the results of the second one. In our view, however, the order was, at the least, an appropriate exercise of the trial court’s discretion, see NEC Electronics, Inc. v. VG Sales Co., 655 So.2d 1146 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995); Air Conditioning Equip. Inc. v. Rogers, 551 So.2d 554 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989); see also Ehrhart v. Raymond James & Assocs., 536 So.2d 1178 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989), and — although we need not directly so hold— may even have been required as a matter of law. See Martinez v. Marin, — So.2d -, 1997. WL 620202 (Fla. 3d DCA Case no. 96-3219, opinion filed, July 30, 1997)[22 FLW D1847](holding that final judgment may not be formally entered on complaint alone, but must await adjudication of defenses and counterclaim).

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

698 So. 2d 1299, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 9698, 1997 WL 525599, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cap-construction-inc-v-tgsv-construction-inc-fladistctapp-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack