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.

Medellin v. MLA Consulting, Inc.

Citations: 69 So. 3d 372; 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 14665; 2011 WL 4102290Docket: No. 5D10-1325

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida; September 16, 2011; Florida; State Appellate Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

In this appellate case, the appellants, having contracted with MLA Consulting, Inc. (d/b/a UBuildlt) for consulting services related to home construction, challenged the trial court's decision favoring UBuildlt regarding fraudulent lien claims, slander of title, and attorney's fees. The case centered on whether UBuildlt's filing of a lien after the appellants terminated their contract prior to the Construction Phase violated Florida Statutes section 713.31. The trial court initially ruled that UBuildlt acted in good faith, thus dismissing the fraudulent lien claim. However, the appellate court found error in the trial court's interpretation, emphasizing that a lien could be deemed fraudulent if it contained non-lienable claims, irrespective of good faith belief. The appellate court also found fault in the dismissal of the slander of title claim against UBuildlt's owner, Monty L. Anderson, recognizing the lien's lack of basis in lienable services. Furthermore, the court determined that the appellants were entitled to attorney's fees for resisting the mechanic’s lien. The case was reversed and remanded for further proceedings, with instructions to assess the lien's fraudulent nature and to determine appropriate attorney's fees, applying the relevant 2008 statutes.

Legal Issues Addressed

Applicability of 2008 Statutes

Application: The court confirmed the use of the 2008 statutes since the contract was signed that year.

Reasoning: The court confirmed that the 2008 statutes apply, as the contract was signed in that year.

Attorney's Fees for Resisting Mechanic’s Lien

Application: Appellants were entitled to attorney's fees for successfully resisting the mechanic’s lien despite not prevailing on other claims.

Reasoning: The court outlined the elements necessary to prove a disparagement claim and agreed with the Appellants' assertion that they were entitled to attorney's fees for successfully resisting the mechanic’s lien, despite not prevailing on other claims.

Fraudulent Lien under Florida Statutes Section 713.31

Application: The court ruled that a lien could be deemed fraudulent if it includes non-lienable claims, even if there is a good faith belief of entitlement.

Reasoning: The court clarified that a trial court can determine that a lien was willfully exaggerated if it includes non-lienable claims, independent of the lienor's good faith belief of entitlement.

Good Faith Dispute in Lien Claims

Application: The trial court erred by concluding that good faith disputes automatically negate a finding of fraud in lien claims.

Reasoning: The trial court erred in its Final Judgment by stating that minor mistakes or good faith disputes negate a finding of fraud, contrary to the statute’s intent.

Slander of Title

Application: The court found that the ruling against the slander of title claim was inappropriate due to the lien lacking a basis in lienable services.

Reasoning: Additionally, the trial court's ruling against the Appellants' slander of title claim against Anderson was deemed inappropriate, given the lien lacked a basis in lienable services.