Monthly Archives: April 2015
Many Florida contractors and license holders have a general understanding of the Florida Construction Industry Licensing Board (“CILB”), but like many quasi-judicial bodies, it can remain a mystery to those who practice and appear in front of the CILB. This post will cover some specific information regarding applications for license holders to qualify an additional business entity. Read Full Post
In construction defect claims, various insurance policies are often implicated. These policies can span many years, so it is critical to determine what policy or policies may provide insurance coverage for the damages that ensue. The insurance policies at play, for general contractors, subcontractors and suppliers, are typically comprehensive general liability policies. Assuming these parties have such policies, the question then becomes what policies apply and do the policies cover the claims. Read Full Post
When a customer deposits a check the bank customarily credits the customer’s account in a practice known as a “provisional settlement.” Under a provisional settlement customers are allowed to draw on the deposited funds even though the bank has yet to present the check to the drawee bank and receive payment (i.e., “final settlement”). In the event the check is subsequently dishonored banks have the right under the Uniform Commercial Code (“UCC”) to charge-back the customers’ account. Read Full Post
By: Brittany N. Snell, Esq. and Austin B. Calhoun, Esq.
In 2013, the Florida Arbitration Code was amended and is now known as the “Revised Florida Arbitration Code” (“RFAC”). RFAC applies to all agreements to arbitrate that were made on or after July 1, 2013. Arbitration agreements entered into before July 1, 2013, may be subject to RFAC if all parties consent to RFAC’s application. Beginning July 1, 2016, an agreement to arbitrate, regardless of its date, will be subject to RFAC. Section 682.013, Florida Statutes (2014). Read Full Post
This blog post is part IV in a series of posts discussing why community associations cannot afford to ignore lender foreclosure actions. The underlying theme of this series is that associations have a financial interest and lien rights in their properties and by ignoring lender foreclosure actions, associations are ignoring their own financial interests and main sources of revenue. Read Full Post
By: Brandon C. Meadows, Esq.
Many parties engaged in litigation are primarily concerned with resolving their disputes through the most cost-efficient means. In the early stages of litigation, clients pose some version of the following question: “Who is going to pay my legal fees?” Under the common law, each party should bear their own legal expenses incurred. However, entitlement to fees can exist if provided by contract or statute. Because contractual and statutory entitlement to fees is in derogation to the common law, strict compliance with the contract or statute is required. This article addresses a party’s ability to recover statutory attorneys’ fees through strict compliance with the rules and statutes regarding a Proposal for Settlement. Read Full Post
By Hans C. Wahl, Esq.
This blog post is part III in a series of posts discussing why community associations cannot afford to ignore lender foreclosure actions. The underlying theme of this series is that associations have a financial interest and lien rights in their properties and by ignoring lender foreclosure actions, associations are ignoring their own financial interests and main sources of revenue. Part I explained that associations have the statutory power to expedite the foreclosure process when lenders are delaying and also illustrated that by implementing a consistent policy for appearing in lender foreclosure actions and expediting the legal proceedings, associations can save tens of thousands of dollars over the years. Part II addressed the unclaimed revenue in the form of foreclosure sale proceeds that associations fail to capitalize on due to not appearing in lender foreclosure actions. This blog post will discuss the advantage associations have in determining, during the foreclosure action, whether the lender is entitled to safe harbor protection or whether the foreclosing entity owes the full amount of unpaid assessments and other charges to the association. Read Full Post