You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Bari Builders, Inc. v. Hovstone Properties Florida, Hovesite Monteverde 1&2, and Town & Country Builders, Inc.

Citations: 155 So. 3d 1160; 2014 WL 3843070; 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 12031Docket: 4D14-765

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida; August 6, 2014; Florida; State Appellate Court

Original Court Document: View Document

Narrative Opinion Summary

This case involves an appeal by Bari Builders, Inc. against the Circuit Court’s denial of its motion to compel arbitration in a construction defect lawsuit. Initially, a condominium association filed suit against property developers, including Hovstone Properties, which then brought a third-party complaint against its subcontractors, such as Bari Builders. The subcontract at issue contained both an arbitration clause and a jury waiver clause. The trial court found these provisions to be conflicting, therefore refusing to compel arbitration. However, the appellate court applied a de novo review standard, focusing on the enforceability of the arbitration clause and concluded that the clauses could coexist without creating ambiguity. The court emphasized that arbitration should be favored as a primary method for dispute resolution and cited supporting case law that allows arbitration to coexist with judicial proceedings under specific conditions. Accordingly, the appellate court reversed the trial court's decision, finding the arbitration provision valid and remanded the case for an order compelling arbitration.

Legal Issues Addressed

Arbitration as a Primary Dispute Resolution Mechanism

Application: The court emphasized that arbitration should be favored as the primary method for dispute resolution, aligning with precedents that permit arbitration alongside judicial proceedings under certain conditions.

Reasoning: Case law supports this interpretation. In *Saturna v. Bickely Construction Co.*, the Georgia Court of Appeals upheld an arbitration clause while allowing judicial proceedings under specific conditions, indicating that arbitration remains the primary method for dispute resolution.

Contract Interpretation and Ambiguity

Application: The court applied a de novo review standard to interpret the subcontract and found that the arbitration and jury waiver clauses could be harmoniously interpreted.

Reasoning: The appellate court outlines the criteria for compelling arbitration, focusing on whether a valid written agreement exists, and applies a de novo review standard for contract interpretation.

Enforceability of Arbitration Clauses

Application: The appellate court determined that the arbitration clause in the subcontract between Bari Builders and Hovstone Properties is enforceable, despite the presence of a jury waiver clause.

Reasoning: Ultimately, the court concludes that the jury waiver clause does not create ambiguity, allowing both provisions to coexist and affirming the validity of the arbitration agreement.

Harmonious Interpretation of Contractual Provisions

Application: The decision highlights that additional dispute resolution clauses do not invalidate a clear arbitration provision if they can be harmoniously interpreted with the arbitration clause.

Reasoning: The overall conclusion is that additional dispute resolution clauses do not invalidate a clear arbitration provision if they can be harmoniously interpreted.