<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:x="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:excel" xmlns:p="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:powerpoint" xmlns:a="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:access" xmlns:dt="uuid:C2F41010-65B3-11d1-A29F-00AA00C14882" xmlns:s="uuid:BDC6E3F0-6DA3-11d1-A2A3-00AA00C14882" xmlns:rs="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:rowset" xmlns:z="#RowsetSchema" xmlns:b="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:publisher" xmlns:ss="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:spreadsheet" xmlns:c="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:component:spreadsheet" xmlns:odc="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:odc" xmlns:oa="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:activation" xmlns:html="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40" xmlns:q="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/" xmlns:rtc="http://microsoft.com/officenet/conferencing" xmlns:D="DAV:" xmlns:Repl="http://schemas.microsoft.com/repl/" xmlns:mt="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/soap/meetings/" xmlns:x2="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/excel/2003/xml" xmlns:ppda="http://www.passport.com/NameSpace.xsd" xmlns:ois="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/soap/ois/" xmlns:dir="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/soap/directory/" xmlns:ds="http://www.w3.org/2000/09/xmldsig#" xmlns:dsp="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/dsp" xmlns:udc="http://schemas.microsoft.com/data/udc" xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" xmlns:sub="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/soap/2002/1/alerts/" xmlns:ec="http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmlenc#" xmlns:sp="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/" xmlns:sps="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/soap/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:udcs="http://schemas.microsoft.com/data/udc/soap" xmlns:udcxf="http://schemas.microsoft.com/data/udc/xmlfile" xmlns:udcp2p="http://schemas.microsoft.com/data/udc/parttopart" xmlns:wf="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/soap/workflow/" xmlns:dsss="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2006/digsig-setup" xmlns:dssi="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2006/digsig" xmlns:mdssi="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/package/2006/digital-signature" xmlns:mver="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/markup-compatibility/2006" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns:mrels="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/package/2006/relationships" xmlns:spwp="http://microsoft.com/sharepoint/webpartpages" xmlns:ex12t="http://schemas.microsoft.com/exchange/services/2006/types" xmlns:ex12m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/exchange/services/2006/messages" xmlns:pptsl="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/soap/SlideLibrary/" xmlns:spsl="http://microsoft.com/webservices/SharePointPortalServer/PublishedLinksService" xmlns:Z="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:" xmlns:st="" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 12 (filtered medium)"><!--[if !mso]><style>v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</style><![endif]--><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Verdana;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
p.MsoListParagraph, li.MsoListParagraph, div.MsoListParagraph
{mso-style-priority:34;
margin-top:0in;
margin-right:0in;
margin-bottom:0in;
margin-left:.5in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";}
p.a5326344-b517-48fb-a688-8e7063b6b0fb, li.a5326344-b517-48fb-a688-8e7063b6b0fb, div.a5326344-b517-48fb-a688-8e7063b6b0fb
{mso-style-name:a5326344-b517-48fb-a688-8e7063b6b0fb;
mso-style-priority:99;
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
span.EmailStyle20
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:windowtext;}
span.EmailStyle21
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle23
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:windowtext;}
span.text
{mso-style-name:text;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
/* List Definitions */
@list l0
{mso-list-id:1239708304;
mso-list-type:hybrid;
mso-list-template-ids:-169855360 1330256034 67698713 67698715 67698703 67698713 67698715 67698703 67698713 67698715;}
@list l0:level1
{mso-level-text:"\(%1\)";
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";
mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri;
mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri;
mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri;
mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";
color:windowtext;}
ol
{margin-bottom:0in;}
ul
{margin-bottom:0in;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal>Michael,<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Regarding 85.021, I concede the statute is not elegantly drafted, but it does appear to provide currently for personal liability by the owner for non-privity liens. I base this conclusion on three authorities: <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoListParagraph style='text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1'><![if !supportLists]><span style='mso-list:Ignore'>(1)<span style='font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"'> </span></span><![endif]>85.021 cross-references 85.011, which provides for a “special action at law” in subsection (4) of 85.011 as to which “The judgment for plaintiff is a personal judgment against defendant as well as a lien on the property, which it shall describe, and shall direct execution against the property, as well as against the property generally of defendant<span style='color:navy'>.” </span><i>See</i> F.S. 85.011(4);<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoListParagraph style='margin-top:6.0pt;text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1'><![if !supportLists]><span class=text><span style='mso-list:Ignore'>(2)<span style='font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"'> </span></span></span><![endif]>85.021 itself provides that “<span class=text>The judgment may provide for the recovery from the contractor or other person for whom the labor or material was furnished, if the contractor or other person is joined in the action, of the amount due by him or her, <i>and from the owner of the amount due by the owner to the contractor</i> . . . <i><u>as well as enforce the lien against the property</u></i> of such owner for such amount.” The “as well as” language is meaningless unless the language after the word “and” is intended to provide for a personal money judgment against the owner. Prior to the “as well as” language, the sentence starts with providing for a “recovery from the contractor” and continues with “and from the owner”. What is a recovery against a contractor except a money judgment? </span><span class=text><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoListParagraph style='margin-top:6.0pt;text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1'><![if !supportLists]><span style='mso-list:Ignore'>(3)<span style='font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"'> </span></span><![endif]><i>Logan Constr. Co. v. Warren Bros. Constr. Co., </i>268 So.2d 369, 371 (Fla. 1972) – the Supreme Court interpreted 85.021 as providing for a personal money judgment against a property owner by a materialman in privity with a subcontractor. Specifically, the court cited with approval the following statement by Chief Judge Carroll of the Third District stating as follows: “I concur in the judgment affirming the holding that a lien was established against the affected property of the owner and affirming the granting of a money judgment against the <i>owner</i>, for the value of materials supplied by the plaintiff to the sub-contractor, since the statute expressly so authorizes.” (Emphasis original). The <i>Logan</i> court went on to hold that the statute did not similarly provide for a personal money judgment against the contractor, “but only for the lien against the property and any personal judgment against an owner . . . .” <i>Id</i>. at 371.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>You also make some interesting points about 95.11. That said, I’m not sure what direction you are suggesting. First, you acknowledge conflicts among the various sections of 95.11, 255.05(10), 713.23(1)(e) and 337.18(1)(d). However, it is not clear what you would do differently about it. For those who don’t have these statutes at their fingertips, I attach a Word document with these sections reproduced with the conflicting language italicized. There is simply no way to reconcile 95.11(5)(e) and 255.05(10), for example. Section 95.11(5)(e) references as the “trigger” date for the SOL the last date of work of the claimant OR the last date of work of the contractor. Why is the last date of work for the contractor even relevant? In any event, that provision directly conflicts with 255.05(10), which makes the last date of work of the claimant the relevant date EXCEPT FOR retainage, as to which there are no fewer than 22 lines of text defining the “trigger” date for the SOL for actions on the payment bond FOR RETAINAGE. If you ask me, that’s an ambiguity and a conflict.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>You contend the words “governed by” are ambiguous as compared with the “principal on the bond” language. I simply don’t see the ambiguity. Is anyone really unclear as to which bonds 255.05(10) applies? To the extent there was any ambiguity before, 255.50 was amended several years ago to provide that “<span class=text><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"'>The payment bond provisions of all bonds required by subsection (1) shall be construed and deemed statutory payment bonds furnished pursuant to this section and such bonds shall not under any circumstances be converted into common law bonds.” See 255.05(4). </span></span>Thus, there is no need to maintain a duplicative – and conflicting – statute of limitations in 95.11 for public project payment bonds. The SOL is defined in exacting detail in 255.05(10) and should be left intact. Similarly, the specific SOLs for transportation projects (337.18(1)(d)) and private project statutory payment bonds (713.23(1)(e)) should also be preserved and the existing ambiguity eliminated.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>The only conceivable reason to keep 95.11(5)(e) around is to shorten the statute of limitations on non-statutory bonds (sometimes referred to confusingly as “common law bonds”) to one year versus the normal five year SOL for any other action founded on a written instrument. As currently worded, 95.11(2)(b) (five year SOL for actions on a written instrument, excepting only statutory bonds) and 95.11(5)(e) (one year SOL for all payment bond actions) appear to provide five year and one year SOLs, respectively, for these bonds, an obvious conflict. If we can agree this conflict should be resolved, what is the policy reason behind a shortened SOL for non-statutory bonds? An action under a statutory bond is a creature of statute and subject to the strict limits in the statute. For example, there are notice provisions that apply to statutory bonds that do not apply to non-statutory bonds. Why should the SOL for a statutory bond apply to a non-statutory bond? No one has made that case yet to my knowledge.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Reese<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><DIV
style="BORDER-LEFT: #000000 1px solid; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; MARGIN: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px">
<DIV
style="BORDER-BOTTOM: #000000 1px solid; PADDING-BOTTOM: 5px; MARGIN: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; WIDTH: 487px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; HEIGHT: auto; PADDING-TOP: 0px">
<P
style="PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; MARGIN: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 10px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; FONT-FAMILY: Times New Roman; FONT-SIZE: 12px; PADDING-TOP: 0px"><STRONG><FONT
size=3>Reese J. Henderson, Jr.</FONT></STRONG></P>
<P
style="PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; MARGIN: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 10px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; FONT-FAMILY: Times New Roman; FONT-SIZE: 12px; PADDING-TOP: 0px">Board Certified Construction Attorney
</P></DIV>
<TABLE border=0 cellSpacing=5 cellPadding=5>
<TBODY>
<TR>
<TD>
<P><IMG alt="" src="cid:tritthenderson_logo032ad8.jpg" width=331 height=78></P>
<P><SPAN
style="PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; MARGIN: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; FONT-FAMILY: Times New Roman; FONT-SIZE: 12px; PADDING-TOP: 0px">707 Peninsular Place<BR>Jacksonville,
Florida 32204<BR><BR>Phone (904) 354-5200<BR>Facsimile (904) 354-5256<BR><A
href="mailto:%5Be-mail%5D">Reese.Henderson@atritt.com </A><BR><A
href="http://www.tritthenderson.com/">www.tritthenderson.com</A></SPAN></P></TD>
<TD>
<P align=center> <IMG src="cid:image00669d3.jpg" width=94
height=123></P></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<P
style="PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; MARGIN: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 10px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; FONT-FAMILY: Times New Roman; FONT-SIZE: 12px; PADDING-TOP: 0px"> </P></DIV><BR>
<P
style="PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; MARGIN: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; FONT-FAMILY: Times New Roman; FONT-SIZE: 12px; PADDING-TOP: 0px">CONFIDENTIALITY
NOTICE: The information and all attachments contained in this electronic
communication are legally privileged and confidential information, subject to
the attorney-client privilege and intended only for the use of intended
recipients. If the reader of this message is not an intended recipient, you are
hereby notified that any review, use, dissemination, distribution or copying of
this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this
communication in error, please notify us immediately of the error by return
email and please permanently remove any copies of this message from your system
and do not retain any copies, whether in electronic or physical form or
otherwise. Unauthorized interception of this e-mail is a violation of federal
criminal law.<BR><BR>TAX ADVICE DISCLOSURE: Pursuant to the requirements of
Internal Revenue Service Circular 230, we advise you that any federal tax advice
contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or
written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of: (1) avoiding
penalties that maybe imposed under the Internal Revenue Code or (2) promoting,
marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed
in this communication.<BR><BR>Disclaimer regarding Uniform Electronic
Transactions Act ("UETA") (Florida Statutes Section 668.50): If this
communication concerns negotiation of a contract or agreement, UETA does not
apply to this communication; contract formation in this matter shall occur only
with manually-affixed original signatures on original
documents.</P><br><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'> constructionlaw-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:constructionlaw-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Gibbons, Michael<br><b>Sent:</b> Monday, July 11, 2011 2:38 PM<br><b>To:</b> RPPTL constructionlaw<br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [RPPTL-constructionlaw] Lien Law Legislative Proposal<o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:blue'> We are in agreement that the various SOL provisions are in conflict and need some "tightening up". I disagree with the proposed manner of eliminating the existing inconsistencies. The fatal flaw in the proposed language is abandoning the existing reference to "principal on the bond" and replacing it with the ambiguous "bond governed by the applicable provisions of Fla. Stat. s. 255.05 and 713.23". This language replaces certainty with uncertainty and represents a "fix" we don't need.</span><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:blue'> I would concede that certainty and predictibility, while important, are not the only polestars for good legislation. I would also agree that GC's and their sureties should not benefit when they fail to list surety information on a NOC or fail to record Payment Bond in public records on public projects. Those limited circumstances can be adequately addressed by adding tolling language that tolls the running of the one year period until the bonds are recorded in the public records or a corrected NOC is recorded listing the omitted surety and attaching the payment bond. A longer SOL for unrecorded subcontractor payment bonds may also be appropriate.</span><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:blue'> What we don't need is the proposed ambiguous language that invites attorneys to litigate hypertechnical issues of whether the bond in question is "governed by" 255.05 or 713.23. Use the existing reference to "bonds on which the principal is a contractor ... for private work as well as public work". If it ain't broke don't "fix" it.</span><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:blue'> </span><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'><o:p></o:p></span></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'> <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><p><b>Michael R. Gibbons (<a href="http://lowndes-law.com/our-people/michael-r-gibbons">Bio</a>)<br>Shareholder<br></b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;color:green'>Lowndes, Drosdick, Doster, Kantor & Reed, P.A.<br>450 South Orange Avenue, 8th Floor<br>Orlando, FL 32801<br>Phone: 407-418-6378<br>Fax: 407-843-4444<br>email:</span> <a href="mailto:michael.gibbons@lowndes-law.com"><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>michael.gibbons@lowndes-law.com</span></a><br><span style='font-size:10.0pt;color:green'>website:</span> <a href="http://www.lowndes-law.com/"><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>http://www.lowndes-law.com</span></a><br><br> <img border=0 width=70 height=67 id="_x0000_i1031" src="cid:image001.jpg@01CC3FE0.069E8CE0"><o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'> <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div class=MsoNormal align=center style='text-align:center'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'><hr size=2 width="100%" align=center></span></div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'> constructionlaw-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:constructionlaw-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Dan Vega<br><b>Sent:</b> Monday, July 11, 2011 1:46 PM<br><b>To:</b> RPPTL constructionlaw<br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [RPPTL-constructionlaw] Lien Law Legislative Proposal</span><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>Michael, your concern about the change to 95.11 misses the mark. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>First and most importantly, there is an initial obvious conflict in the statutes in question that needs to be resolved as to when the SOL on a payment bond claim starts to run. That’s priority. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>Second, there is no need for a one year SOL on claims against bonds that are not required or provided for by statute such as 255.05, 337.18 or 713.23 bonds. The reasons are as follows: (1) those statutory bonds are simply that – statutory creatures to be strictly construed as they derogate the common law by providing a statutory claim/basis to get paid for something otherwise protected by contract law; and (2) the statutory bonds are required to be identified and attached to the Notice of Commencement and recorded in the public records placing the beneficiaries of those bonds on “notice” that they exist, hence the short SOL.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>A bond issued on behalf of a subcontractor is simply a contract. It is not provided for or required by any statute and does not need to be recorded. As such, it should be subject to the standard 5 year SOL applicable to claims on written contracts, especially since those bonds are not recorded nor identified in the NOC. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>Finally, the common law v. statutory bond dichotomy is for the most part extinct. Additionally, from my experience the argument generally centered on the position that a GC statutory bond was rendered a common law bond because it was not recorded or identified and/or attached to the NOC. Those are legitimate concerns as they impact the time requirements for serving a Notice to Contractor and/or a Notice of Non-payment as well as the time to file suit. However, those concerns are not applicable to subcontractor bonds. And for the most part, the common law bond concerns were cured by different amendments to 255.05 and 713.23 and 713.13. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>In sum, I see no harm in making sure that we are all on the same page as it pertains to when the SOL starts to run on GC bond claims and that those claims against bonds not required by statute be subject to the same SOL applicable to any other contract.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>Thank you. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>Daniel R. Vega<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>Board Certified in Construction Law<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>Vezina, Lawrence & Piscitelli, P.A.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>121 Alhambra Plaza, Suite 1604<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>Coral Gables, Florida 33134<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>Main (305) 443-2043<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>Fax (305) 443-2048<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>Cell (305) 962-5186<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><a href="mailto:dvega@vlplaw.com">dvega@vlplaw.com</a><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;color:black'>************************************************<br>The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the recipient(s) named above. This message may be an attorney-client communication and as such is privileged and confidential. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or an agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this document in error and that any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail, and delete the original message.<br>************************************************</span><span style='font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:blue'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'> constructionlaw-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:constructionlaw-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Gibbons, Michael<br><b>Sent:</b> Monday, July 11, 2011 1:01 PM<br><b>To:</b> RPPTL constructionlaw<br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [RPPTL-constructionlaw] Lien Law Legislative Proposal<o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:blue'> I could not make the call today but write to express my views on the proposed legislative changes. The proposed changes to Ch. 85 (dealing with Owner's exposure to personal judgments on claims brought by non-privity claimants) and Ch. 95 (dropping the one year SOL for all bonds) are problematic for following reasons:</span><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:blue'> 1. Fla. Stat. s. 85.021--- This unintelligible legislation admittedly cries out to be rewritten. Issue is making the Owner liable personally to non-privity lienors foreclosing their construction liens. I realize that there is a 1917 case and a 1969 case that arguably supports holding an Owner personally liable for claims of non-privity lienors. As construction law is practiced today, however, at least in my universe, the Owner is only personally liable to lienor claimants who enjoy a direct contractual relationship with owner. So, for example, when a subcontractor lien is bonded off by a GC pursuant to Fla. Stat. s. 713.24, the Owner is no longer a proper party to the action. Owners should not bear personal liability for construction debts owed to subcontractors. I believe having an in rem remedy along with a contractual remedy against the contracting party (other than Owner) is adequate for the protection of lower tier subs and suppliers. I would recommend that the statute be clarified, consistent with practice today, that the Owner not be subject to personal liability when a non-privity lienor is foreclosing its lien. Owner, under certain circumstances, should continue to be liable to non-privity claimants for unjust enrichment.</span><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:blue'> </span><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:blue'> 2. Fla. Stat. s. 95.11 (2) (b) and (e)-- While there is an inconsistency among the SOL's as noted, the prescribed "cure" will prove far more harmful than the existing shortcoming (which boils down to measuring the one year SOL period from the date of sub's last date of furnishing vs. GC's last date of furnishing). The proposed change will lead us right back to the bad old days when bond claims were dominated by arguments about whether the bond was a "statutory bond" or a "common law bond". The provision sought to be deleted at s. 95.11 (2) (e) was actually passed to eliminate all the uncertainty and expense associated with litigating that issue which generated great confusion in the trial courts. The beauty of the existing language is that it doesn't matter whether the bond is "statutory" or "common law"-- the one year period applies. Now we are going to replace that clarity with the ambiguous proposed language which introduces the same fog that generated the years of unproductive and wasteful litigation on common law vs. statutory bonds. If you want to make the SOL's all consistent, it is easy to do without injecting all the uncertainty and ambiguity the proposed legislation offers. </span><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'><o:p></o:p></span></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'> <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><p><b>Michael R. Gibbons (<a href="http://lowndes-law.com/our-people/michael-r-gibbons">Bio</a>)<br>Shareholder<br></b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;color:green'>Lowndes, Drosdick, Doster, Kantor & Reed, P.A.<br>450 South Orange Avenue, 8th Floor<br>Orlando, FL 32801<br>Phone: 407-418-6378<br>Fax: 407-843-4444<br>email:</span> <a href="mailto:michael.gibbons@lowndes-law.com"><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>michael.gibbons@lowndes-law.com</span></a><br><span style='font-size:10.0pt;color:green'>website:</span> <a href="http://www.lowndes-law.com/"><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>http://www.lowndes-law.com</span></a><br><br> <img border=0 width=70 height=67 id="_x0000_i1025" src="cid:image001.jpg@01CC3FE0.069E8CE0"><o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'> <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div class=MsoNormal align=center style='text-align:center'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'><hr size=2 width="100%" align=center></span></div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'> constructionlaw-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:constructionlaw-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Reese J. Henderson, Jr.<br><b>Sent:</b> Monday, July 11, 2011 11:24 AM<br><b>To:</b> constructionlaw@lists.flabarrpptl.org<br><b>Subject:</b> [RPPTL-constructionlaw] Lien Law Legislative Proposal<br><b>Importance:</b> High</span><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal>Folks,<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>In connection with today’s call, please find attached the legislative committee’s proposal for which we are seeking approval to forward to the Executive Council for further action and, hopefully, submission during the 2012 legislative session. Attached are:<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoListParagraph style='text-indent:-.25in'>1.<span style='font-size:7.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'> </span>Legislative Position Request Form<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoListParagraph style='text-indent:-.25in'>2.<span style='font-size:7.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'> </span>Proposal<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoListParagraph style='text-indent:-.25in'>3.<span style='font-size:7.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'> </span>White Paper<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>The long and short is that we are seeking to clarify certain provisions of the lien law to eliminate contradictory references, clarify the statute of limitations on actions on payment bonds, tweak the statutory claim of lien form; tweak the statutory notice of commencement form and clean up the section dealing with electronic proof of delivery. I will be on the call to answer any questions.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Thanks,<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Reese<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div style='border:none;border-left:solid black 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 0in'><div style='border:none;border-bottom:solid black 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 4.0pt 0in'><p style='margin:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt'><strong>Reese J. Henderson, Jr.</strong><span style='font-size:9.0pt'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p style='margin:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt'><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>Board Certified Construction Attorney <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><table class=MsoNormalTable border=0 cellspacing=5 cellpadding=0><tr><td style='padding:3.75pt 3.75pt 3.75pt 3.75pt'><p><img border=0 width=331 height=78 id="_x0000_i1027" src="cid:image002.jpg@01CC3FE0.069E8CE0"><o:p></o:p></p><p><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>707 Peninsular Place<br>Jacksonville, Florida 32204<br><br>Phone (904) 354-5200<br>Facsimile (904) 354-5256<br><a href="mailto:%5Be-mail%5D">Reese.Henderson@atritt.com </a><br><a href="http://www.tritthenderson.com/">www.tritthenderson.com</a></span><o:p></o:p></p></td><td style='padding:3.75pt 3.75pt 3.75pt 3.75pt'><p align=center style='text-align:center'> <img border=0 width=94 height=123 id="_x0000_i1028" src="cid:image003.jpg@01CC3FE0.069E8CE0"><o:p></o:p></p></td></tr></table><p style='margin:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt'><span style='font-size:9.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p style='margin:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt'><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The information and all attachments contained in this electronic communication are legally privileged and confidential information, subject to the attorney-client privilege and intended only for the use of intended recipients. If the reader of this message is not an intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, use, dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately of the error by return email and please permanently remove any copies of this message from your system and do not retain any copies, whether in electronic or physical form or otherwise. Unauthorized interception of this e-mail is a violation of federal criminal law.<br><br>TAX ADVICE DISCLOSURE: Pursuant to the requirements of Internal Revenue Service Circular 230, we advise you that any federal tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of: (1) avoiding penalties that maybe imposed under the Internal Revenue Code or (2) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed in this communication.<br><br>Disclaimer regarding Uniform Electronic Transactions Act ("UETA") (Florida Statutes Section 668.50): If this communication concerns negotiation of a contract or agreement, UETA does not apply to this communication; contract formation in this matter shall occur only with manually-affixed original signatures on original documents.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'><br> <o:p></o:p></span></p><div><div class=MsoNormal align=center style='text-align:center'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'><hr size=2 width="100%" noshade style='color:#CC9900' align=center></span></div></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'> <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><table class=MsoNormalTable border=0 cellspacing=0 cellpadding=0 width="100%" style='width:100.0%;border-collapse:collapse'><tr><td width="11%" style='width:11.0%;padding:0in 0in 0in 0in'><p class=a5326344-b517-48fb-a688-8e7063b6b0fb><a href="http://www.lowndes-law.com/"><span style='text-decoration:none'><img border=0 width=108 height=126 id="_x0000_i1030" src="cid:image004.gif@01CC3FE0.069E8CE0"></span></a><o:p></o:p></p></td><td width="50%" style='width:50.0%;padding:0in 0in 0in 0in'><div><p class=MsoNormal><strong><u><span style='font-size:7.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'>Notice of Confidentiality:</span></u></strong><span style='font-size:7.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'> This e-mail communication and the attachment(s) hereto, if any, are intended solely for the information and use of the addressee(s) identified above and may contain information which is legally privileged from disclosure and/or otherwise confidential. If a recipient of this e-mail communication is not an addressee (or an authorized representative of an addressee), such recipient is hereby advised that any review, disclosure, reproduction, re-transmission or other dissemination or use of this e-mail communication (or any information contained herein) is strictly prohibited. If you are not an addressee and have received this e-mail communication in error, please advise the sender of that circumstance either by reply e-mail or by telephone at (800) 356-6818, immediately delete this e-mail communication from any computer and destroy all physical copies of same. </span><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div></td></tr></table></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><strong><u><span style='font-size:7.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'>Replies Filtered:</span></u></strong><strong><span style='font-size:7.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'> </span></strong><span style='font-size:7.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'>Any incoming reply to this e-mail communication or other e-mail communication to us will be electronically filtered for "spam" and/or "viruses." That filtering process may result in such reply or other e-mail communications to us being quarantined (i.e., potentially not received at our site at all) and/or delayed in reaching us. For that reason, we cannot guarantee that we will receive your reply or other e-mail communications to us and/or that we will receive the same in a timely manner. Accordingly, you should consider sending communications to us which are particularly important or time-sensitive by means other than e-mail. </span><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div><p><strong><u><span style='font-size:7.5pt'>Notice Under U.S. Treasury Department Circular 230:</span></u></strong><span style='font-size:7.5pt'> To the extent that this e-mail communication and the attachment(s) hereto, if any, may contain written advice concerning or relating to a Federal (U.S.) tax issue, United States Treasury Department Regulations (Circular 230) require that we (and we do hereby) advise and disclose to you that, unless we expressly state otherwise in writing, such tax advice is not written or intended to be used, and cannot be used by you (the addressee), or other person(s), for purposes of (1) avoiding penalties imposed under the United States Internal Revenue Code or (2) promoting, marketing or recommending to any other person(s) the (or any of the) transaction(s) or matter(s) addressed, discussed or referenced herein. Each taxpayer should seek advice from an independent tax advisor with respect to any Federal tax issue(s), transaction(s) or matter(s) addressed, discussed or referenced herein based upon his, her or its particular circumstances.</span><o:p></o:p></p><p><span style='font-size:7.5pt'>[v4.30]</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=a5326344-b517-48fb-a688-8e7063b6b0fb><span style='font-size:7.5pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p><b><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>Notice of Confidentiality:</span></b><span style='font-size:9.0pt'> This e-mail communication and the attachment(s) hereto, if any, are intended solely for the information and use of the addressee(s) identified above and may contain information which is legally privileged from disclosure and/or otherwise confidential. If a recipient of this e-mail communication is not an addressee (or an authorized representative of an addressee), such recipient is hereby advised that any review, disclosure, reproduction, re-transmission or other dissemination or use of this e-mail communication (or any information contained herein) is strictly prohibited. If you are not an addressee and have received this e-mail communication in error, please advise the sender of that circumstance either by reply e-mail or by telephone at (800) 356-6818, immediately delete this e-mail communication from any computer and destroy all physical copies of same. <br><br><b>Replies Filtered:</b> Any incoming reply to this e-mail communication or other e-mail communication to us will be electronically filtered for "spam" and/or "viruses." That filtering process may result in such reply or other e-mail communications to us being quarantined (i.e., potentially not received at our site at all) and/or delayed in reaching us. For that reason, we cannot guarantee that we will receive your reply or other e-mail communications to us and/or that we will receive the same in a timely manner. Accordingly, you should consider sending communications to us which are particularly important or time-sensitive by means other than e-mail. <br><br><b>Notice Under U.S. Treasury Department Circular 230:</b> To the extent that this e-mail communication and the attachment(s) hereto, if any, may contain written advice concerning or relating to a Federal (U.S.) tax issue, United States Treasury Department Regulations (Circular 230) require that we (and we do hereby) advise and disclose to you that, unless we expressly state otherwise in writing, such tax advice is not written or intended to be used, and cannot be used by you (the addressee), or other person(s), for purposes of (1) avoiding penalties imposed under the United States Internal Revenue Code or (2) promoting, marketing or recommending to any other person(s) the (or any of the) transaction(s) or matter(s) addressed, discussed or referenced herein. Each taxpayer should seek advice from an independent tax advisor with respect to any Federal tax issue(s), transaction(s) or matter(s) addressed, discussed or referenced herein based upon his, her or its particular circumstances. [v4.30] <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p><b><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>Notice of Confidentiality:</span></b><span style='font-size:9.0pt'> This e-mail communication and the attachment(s) hereto, if any, are intended solely for the information and use of the addressee(s) identified above and may contain information which is legally privileged from disclosure and/or otherwise confidential. If a recipient of this e-mail communication is not an addressee (or an authorized representative of an addressee), such recipient is hereby advised that any review, disclosure, reproduction, re-transmission or other dissemination or use of this e-mail communication (or any information contained herein) is strictly prohibited. If you are not an addressee and have received this e-mail communication in error, please advise the sender of that circumstance either by reply e-mail or by telephone at (800) 356-6818, immediately delete this e-mail communication from any computer and destroy all physical copies of same. <br><br><b>Replies Filtered:</b> Any incoming reply to this e-mail communication or other e-mail communication to us will be electronically filtered for "spam" and/or "viruses." That filtering process may result in such reply or other e-mail communications to us being quarantined (i.e., potentially not received at our site at all) and/or delayed in reaching us. For that reason, we cannot guarantee that we will receive your reply or other e-mail communications to us and/or that we will receive the same in a timely manner. Accordingly, you should consider sending communications to us which are particularly important or time-sensitive by means other than e-mail. <br><br><b>Notice Under U.S. Treasury Department Circular 230:</b> To the extent that this e-mail communication and the attachment(s) hereto, if any, may contain written advice concerning or relating to a Federal (U.S.) tax issue, United States Treasury Department Regulations (Circular 230) require that we (and we do hereby) advise and disclose to you that, unless we expressly state otherwise in writing, such tax advice is not written or intended to be used, and cannot be used by you (the addressee), or other person(s), for purposes of (1) avoiding penalties imposed under the United States Internal Revenue Code or (2) promoting, marketing or recommending to any other person(s) the (or any of the) transaction(s) or matter(s) addressed, discussed or referenced herein. Each taxpayer should seek advice from an independent tax advisor with respect to any Federal tax issue(s), transaction(s) or matter(s) addressed, discussed or referenced herein based upon his, her or its particular circumstances. [v4.30] <o:p></o:p></span></p></div></body></html>