Morse Diesel Intern. v. 2000 Island Blvd.

698 So. 2d 309, 1997 WL 422769
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedJuly 30, 1997
Docket97-1285
StatusPublished
Cited by12 cases

This text of 698 So. 2d 309 (Morse Diesel Intern. v. 2000 Island Blvd.) 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
Morse Diesel Intern. v. 2000 Island Blvd., 698 So. 2d 309, 1997 WL 422769 (Fla. Ct. App. 1997).

Opinion

698 So.2d 309 (1997)

MORSE DIESEL INTERNATIONAL, INC., a Delaware corporation, Appellant,
v.
2000 ISLAND BOULEVARD, INC., a Delaware corporation, Appellee.

No. 97-1285.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

July 30, 1997.
Rehearing Denied September 10, 1997.

*310 White & Case, and Stephen M. Corse, and Darin A. DiBello, Miami, for appellant.

Zarco & Pardo, P.A., and Stevan J. Pardo, Miami, and Elissa Gainsburg, Plantation; Greenberg, Traurig, Hoffman, Lipoff, Rosen & Quentel, P.A. and Elliot H. Scherker, Miami, for appellee.

Before COPE, GREEN and SORONDO, JJ.

GREEN, Judge.

Morse Diesel International, Inc. ("Morse Diesel"), a general contractor, seeks review of a peremptory writ of mandamus entered in favor of 2000 Island Boulevard, Inc. (hereinafter "Williams Island"), the owner and developer of a 280 unit high-rise condominium project. The writ of mandamus authorized the release of a cash bond which was the corpus of pending litigation between these parties in another circuit court division. We reverse.

I PENDING ACTION

On April 26, 1995, Morse Diesel sued Williams Island allegedly for money due under a construction contract. This construction dispute suit was assigned to and is currently pending in another division of the circuit court.[1] The suit was filed prior to the completion of the project and the parties entered into an agreement (dubbed the "Standstill Agreement") which temporarily stayed the litigation pending the completion of the project. The "Standstill Agreement" *311 provided, among other things, that Morse Diesel would have a lien on a pool of 20 units in the condominium to secure its claim on the issues then in dispute. In exchange, Morse Diesel agreed to release its lien rights with respect to the remaining units. On February 23, 1996, Morse Diesel recorded its claim of lien for $1,816,438 against the pool of units provided for in the "Standstill Agreement." Williams Island posted a bond on a prorated basis as to five of the units. Thereafter, when additional disputes arose between these parties over the project, Morse Diesel asserted additional claims against the project and on April 10, 1996, recorded a statutory claim of lien in the amount of $3,342,388. This April 10, 1996 claim of lien purported to supersede and replace the February 23, 1996 claim of lien for $1,816,438. In its contractor's affidavit dated April 12, 1996, Morse Diesel averred that approximately $2.6 million of $3.3 million dollars claimed was for amounts owed to its subcontractors. Subcontractors also filed their separate claims in amounts exceeding $900,000. Williams Island then posted a cash bond for approximately $4.3 million dollars on May 13, 1996.

The next day, Williams Island filed an emergency motion for the clerk to transfer all of the liens to its cash bond and to reduce Morse Diesel's amended claim of lien and bond when certain subcontractors were paid. The trial court ordered that the liens be transferred to the cash bond but denied Williams Island's request for reduction of the bond upon payment to the subcontractors. Williams Island then filed an amended counterclaim which asserted, in part, a claim for fraudulent lien and declaratory relief. Thereafter, Williams Island filed a motion for partial summary judgment on its amended counterclaim. In this motion, Williams Island again sought, among other things, a reduction of the amended claim of lien and bond based upon its payments made to subcontractors. This motion was denied in an order dated July 17, 1996.

II MANDAMUS ACTION

Having failed to procure a reduction of the amended claim of lien and bond in the pending litigation, on February 29, 1997, Williams Island instituted this original action against the Clerk of the Court for a writ of mandamus and an emergency motion directing the clerk to disburse the cash bond pursuant to section 713.24(4), Florida Statutes (1995).[2] This mandamus action was assigned to the trial court below. In its complaint for mandamus, Williams Island alleged that Morse Diesel had recorded its original claim of lien for $1,816,438 on February 23, 1996 and had subsequently amended the same on April 10, 1996 to increase the claim of lien to $3,342,388. The gravamen of the complaint was that the claim of lien had expired due to Morse Diesel's failure to commence an action to foreclose upon the same within the one (1) year period prescribed by section 713.22(1), Florida Statutes (1995) and/or Williams Island's satisfaction of the subcontractor's liens.

Morse Diesel was not made a party to this mandamus action and inexplicably (and we think, indefensibly) was not given any notice of this proceeding by Williams Island. Moreover, Williams Island never filed a "Notice of Previous Filing" to immediately alert to the existence of the fact that this cash bond was in whole or in part the corpus of a legal dispute pending in another circuit court division. The lower court thereafter issued an order directing the clerk to show cause why the cash bond should not be released to Williams Island.

The Clerk of the Court filed a response to the order to show cause generally denying the allegations that Morse Diesel's claim of lien had expired by operation of law and/or had been satisfied and asserted defenses in opposition to the writ. In its affirmative defenses, the clerk specifically averred that Williams Island did not have a clear legal right to the issuance of the writ where the cash bond in whole or in part was the subject matter or corpus of a legal dispute in another *312 division of the circuit court and where Williams Island had another available legal remedy in the other proceeding. In its order dated March 7, 1997, the lower court granted the emergency motion and directed the clerk to release $3,623,405.07 of the cash bond to Williams Island and in the future, "to disburse to Williams Island any remaining portion of the cash bond in the Court's Registry... which shall expire, be extinguished, satisfied, or otherwise discharged, upon presentation of sufficient evidence demonstrating such expiration, extinguishment, discharge or satisfaction."

By the time that Morse Diesel learned of this order on March 11, 1997,[3] the funds had already been disbursed to Williams Island. Morse Diesel filed an emergency motion to intervene in the action below and a motion for rehearing of the March 7th order. Morse Diesel's motion for intervention was granted and the court heard the motion for rehearing. Without an evidentiary hearing, the lower court granted the motion for rehearing only in part by directing Williams Island to return only $1,750,000[4] of the disbursed funds to an interest bearing account pending the stipulated transfer of this cause to the circuit court division where the litigation between these parties was pending. This appeal followed.

We conclude that the lower court abused its discretion in granting the writ of mandamus where (1) the record did not disclose Williams Island's clear legal right to the same in that a genuine dispute existed as to whether Morse Diesel's claim of lien had expired by operation of law; (2) Williams Island had another adequate legal remedy to procure the release of these funds; and (3) Morse Diesel was an interested party to the mandamus proceeding who had not been brought before the court.

For the issuance of a writ of mandamus, the petitioner must demonstrate a clear legal right to the performance of a ministerial duty by the respondent and that no other adequate remedy exists. See

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

Related

VILLA BELLINI RISTORANTE & LOUNGE, INC. v. CIRO MANCINI
District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2019
Miami-Dade County Board of County Commissioners v. an Accountable Miami-Dade
208 So. 3d 724 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2016)
Wells v. Castro
117 So. 3d 1233 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2013)
Fountas v. Microcomputer Resources, Inc.
110 So. 3d 471 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2013)
Bailey v. State
100 So. 3d 213 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2012)
Yorty v. REALTY INV. & MORTG. CORP., INC.
938 So. 2d 1 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2006)
Harris v. Dade County Corrections Department
901 So. 2d 390 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2005)
Immer v. City of Miami
898 So. 2d 258 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2005)
Superior Garlic Intern., Inc. v. E & A
934 So. 2d 484 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2004)
City of Tallahassee v. Kovach
733 So. 2d 576 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1999)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
698 So. 2d 309, 1997 WL 422769, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/morse-diesel-intern-v-2000-island-blvd-fladistctapp-1997.