[RPPTL-constructionlaw] construction lien - title question

[Meyer, George J.]

It also would seem that the lien against the parents' portion of the property is valid. So if you can't establish the parents were acting in a agency capacity with respect to their son as suggested by Larry, do a partial lien release of only the son's interest in the ppty, take the parent's interest through foreclosure of your lien and then bring a partition action to require the partitioning of the property based upon the respective interests of the parties' in the ppty. If the ppty can't be partitioned because of its nature, I believe the statute allows for a forced sale of the entire ppty and a splitting of the proceeds from the sale based upon the parties respective interests in the ppty.

George

[Carlton Fields]
George J. Meyer
Attorney at Law

4221 W. Boy Scout Blvd., Ste. 1000
Tampa, Florida  33607-5780
Direct:  813.229.4140 | Fax:  813.229.4133

gmeyer at carltonfields.com<mailto:gmeyer at carltonfields.com> | www.carltonfields.com<http://www.carltonfields.com>
bio<http://www.carltonfields.com/gmeyer/> | vcard<http://www.carltonfields.com/load.vcf?type=atty&id=c92aac8a-d713-42f8-bd11-3a5101f160db>




From: constructionlaw-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:constructionlaw-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Larry Leiby
Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2012 9:41 PM
To: RPPTL constructionlaw
Subject: Re: [RPPTL-constructionlaw] construction lien - title question

Off the top of my head I would say yes if you can show that the son was aware of the improvement and did not object.  The argument is that the parents were acting as agents for the son.  If you can't show that the son knew then be sure to add counts under 713.11 and a claim for an equitable lien.  The language on service of documents is helpful. 713.18(4) but it only addresses service.  You have to be concerned with the first sentence of 713.10(1).

Larry R. Leiby, Esq.
Malka & Kravitz, P.A.
1300 Sawgrass Corp. Pkwy., Suite 100
Ft. Lauderdale, FL  33323
Phone:  954-514-0984
Fax:      954-514-0985     e-mail:  leiby at mkpalaw.com<mailto:leiby at mkpalaw.com>

Board Certified in Construction Law
Fla. Supreme Court Certified Circuit Court Civil Mediator

Member, Leiby Alexander Brandt ADR Group, LLC
Member, JAMS Global Engineering and Construction Panel
Fellow, College of Commercial Arbitrators

[Description: JAMSadr.com.jpg]

From: constructionlaw-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org<mailto:constructionlaw-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org> [mailto:constructionlaw-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Tim Atkinson
Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2012 6:54 PM
To: constructionlaw at lists.flabarrpptl.org<mailto:constructionlaw at lists.flabarrpptl.org>
Subject: [RPPTL-constructionlaw] construction lien - title question

Hi all,

Crazy question of the day (for me at least):

May a contractor file a lien against property titled as below where the residential improvement contract (over $2,500) was only between Husband and Wife and contractor (not Son):

Wife, as 7.5 percent tenant in common with Husband, as 42.5 percent tenant in common with Son, as 50 percent owner with Husband and Son holding their individual interests with right of survivorship only between themselves.

Any input or help would be most appreciated!

Best regards,

Tim

Timothy P. Atkinson*
Oertel, Fernandez, Bryant & Atkinson, P.A.
PO Box 1110, Tallahassee, FL 32302
850.521.0700-w | 850.521.0720-f | 850.544.5304-m

* Board Certified State and Federal
   Government and Administrative Practice

[OFBA 60% SM]

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/constructionlaw/attachments/20120810/ebe9fab3/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 3332 bytes
Desc: image001.jpg
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/constructionlaw/attachments/20120810/ebe9fab3/image001.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 3956 bytes
Desc: image002.jpg
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/constructionlaw/attachments/20120810/ebe9fab3/image002.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image003.png
Type: image/png
Size: 6143 bytes
Desc: image003.png
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/constructionlaw/attachments/20120810/ebe9fab3/image003.png>