Condor Construction Co. v. Dec Electric, Inc.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Condor Construction Co. v. Dec Electric, Inc.

547 So. 2d 953, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 1615, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 3780, 1989 WL 73797

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJuly 7, 1989

DocketNo. 88-2142

StatusPublished

This text of 547 So. 2d 953 (Condor Construction Co. v. Dec Electric, 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

Condor Construction Co. v. Dec Electric, Inc., 547 So. 2d 953, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 1615, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 3780, 1989 WL 73797 (Fla. Ct. App. 1989).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED. We find that there is competent, substantial evidence in the record to support the trial court’s conclusion that the appellant-contractor failed to notify the ap-pellee-subcontractor of the owner’s instructions to stop work on the project. Based upon that factual finding we find no error in the trial court’s holding that the appellant is responsible to the appellee for work done after the stop work order was issued, and is not entitled to rely on a contractual provision conditioning its obligation to pay on its receipted payment from the owner. Cf. Peacock Construction Company v. Modern Air Conditioning Inc., 353 So.2d 840 (Fla.1977).

ANSTEAD, LETTS and STONE, JJ„ concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED. We find that there is competent, substantial evidence in the record to support the trial court’s conclusion that the appellant-contractor failed to notify the ap-pellee-subcontractor of the owner’s instructions to stop work on the project. Based upon that factual finding we find no error in the trial court’s holding that the appellant is responsible to the appellee for work done after the stop work order was issued, and is not entitled to rely on a contractual provision conditioning its obligation to pay on its receipted payment from the owner. Cf. Peacock Construction Company v. Modern Air Conditioning Inc., 353 So.2d 840 (Fla.1977).

ANSTEAD, LETTS and STONE, JJ„ concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

547 So. 2d 953, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 1615, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 3780, 1989 WL 73797, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/condor-construction-co-v-dec-electric-inc-fladistctapp-1989.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack