lienriGhtSContinGentonPermanentBeneFittoProPerty
Construction law Section
Continuedfrompage20
Properties moved the lien off the owner’ s property by posting a cash bond with the court. 7 Following a non-jury trial, the court entered judgment in favor of Fort Dallas and ordered the clerk to release funds from the lien transfer bond to satisfy the lien. 8 On appeal, the Fourth District addressed two issues: whether Fort Dallas qualified as a materialman and whether it was entitled to record the lien. 9
Section 713.01( 20), Florida Statutes, defines a materialman as: [ A ] ny person who furnishes materials under contract to the owner, contractor, subcontractor, or sub-subcontractor on the site of the improvement or for direct delivery to the site of the improvement or, for specially fabricated materials, off the site of the improvement for the particular improvement, and who performs no labor in the installation thereof. 10
Relying on the language in Section 713.01( 20), Florida Statutes, the appellate court affirmed the trial court’ s finding that Fort Dallas acted as a materialman as the contract between required Fort Dallas to manufacture and deliver the trusses to the job site. 11
However, the Fourth District reversed the trial court’ s ruling enforcing the lien. 12 In doing so, the court relied on the language of“ improvement” in Section 713.01( 15), Florida Statutes( 2022), which requires that the work or materials provide a permanent benefit to the property. 13 In this case, it was undisputed that the trusses were never delivered to the project site. 14 Because the materials did not provide a permanent benefit, the court ruled Fort Dallas was not entitled a lien on the property. 15
Although Fort Dallas was not entitled to a lien on the property, the court noted that they could
still recover damages for breach of contract. 16 The Fourth District therefore reversed the portion of the judgment enforcing the lien and remanded the case for the trial court to determine the appropriate damages on the breach of contract claim. 17 n
1
JM Properties of W. Palm Beach, Inc. v. Ft. Dallas Truss Co., LLC, 2026 WL 467659, at * 2( Fla. 4th DCA 2026)( citing Palm Beach Mall, Inc. v. Se. Millwork, Inc, 593 So. 2d 1121, 1122( Fla. 4th DCA 1992)).
1
Id. at * 1.
2
Id.
3
Id.
4
Id.
5
JM Properties of W. Palm Beach, Inc., 2026 WL 467659, at * 1.
6
Id.
7
Id.
8
Id.
9
Id.
10
Section 713.01( 20), Florida Statutes( 2022).
11
JM Properties of W. Palm Beach, Inc., 2026 WL 467659, at * 2.
12
Id.
13
Id.
14
Id.
15
Id.
16
JM Properties of W. Palm Beach, Inc., 2026 WL 467659, at * 2.
17
Id.
Looking for your next Great Hire or Job Opportunity?
Visit HCBA’ s Online Career Center at hillsbar. com.
Authors: John P. Amon – Paskert Divers Thompson & Brian T. Allen – Carlton Fields, P. A.
M A y- J U N E 2 0 2 6 | H C B A L A W y E R
2 1