Does anyone have a good case cite (or several) for the proposition that a n upstream party (e.g., owner/general contractor) may deduct payments made to parties further downstream (subs, sub-subs, suppliers, etc.) from the amount owed under their contract with their GC/subcontractor?  The subcontract in my case allows it (and direct payments were in fact made), but I’m looking for a case cite that says the same thing.

Thanks in advance.

Reese J. Henderson, Jr. | Shareholder
Florida Bar Board Certified in Construction Law
G R A Y | R O B I N S O N

50 North Laura Street, Suite 1100 | Jacksonville, Florida 32202
T: 904-598-9929 | F: 904-598-9109 | D: 904-632-8459
E-mailmailto:Reese.Henderson@gray-robinson.com | Websitehttp://www.gray-robinson.com | Biohttp://www.gray-robinson.com/attorneys/detail/1022/ReeseJ-HendersonJr | vCardhttp://www.gray-robinson.com/docs/Reese%20Henderson.vcf

Facebookhttps://www.facebook.com/GrayRobinsonLaw | LinkedInhttps://www.linkedin.com/company/grayrobinson-p-a- | Twitterhttps://twitter.com/grayrobinsonlaw

This e-mail is intended only for the individual(s) or entity(s) named within the message. This e-mail might contain legally privileged and confidential information. If you properly received this e-mail as a client or retained expert, please hold it in confidence to protect the attorney-client or work product privileges. Should the intended recipient forward or disclose this message to another person or party, that action could constitute a waiver of the attorney-client privilege. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or the agent responsible to deliver it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is prohibited by the sender and to do so might constitute a violation of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. section 2510-2521. If this communication was received in error we apologize for the intrusion. Please notify us by reply e-mail and delete the original message without reading same. Nothing in this e-mail message shall, in and of itself, create an attorney-client relationship with the sender.

Folks:  I should have clarified this is NOT a lien issue.  This is a breach of contract issue only.  I’m aware of the proper payments provisions of Chapter 713, but they’re not on point in this situation.  That said, if a case discussed payments to subs and also happened to involve issues of lien law, that might be helpful, depending on whether it turned on the contract’s terms or the lien law.  Hopefully that clarifies things a bit.  And thanks again for any tips.

Reese J. Henderson, Jr. | Shareholder
Florida Bar Board Certified in Construction Law
G R A Y | R O B I N S O N

50 North Laura Street, Suite 1100 | Jacksonville, Florida 32202
T: 904-598-9929 | F: 904-598-9109 | D: 904-632-8459
E-mailmailto:Reese.Henderson@gray-robinson.com | Websitehttp://www.gray-robinson.com | Biohttp://www.gray-robinson.com/attorneys/detail/1022/ReeseJ-HendersonJr | vCardhttp://www.gray-robinson.com/docs/Reese%20Henderson.vcf

Facebookhttps://www.facebook.com/GrayRobinsonLaw | LinkedInhttps://www.linkedin.com/company/grayrobinson-p-a- | Twitterhttps://twitter.com/grayrobinsonlaw

This e-mail is intended only for the individual(s) or entity(s) named within the message. This e-mail might contain legally privileged and confidential information. If you properly received this e-mail as a client or retained expert, please hold it in confidence to protect the attorney-client or work product privileges. Should the intended recipient forward or disclose this message to another person or party, that action could constitute a waiver of the attorney-client privilege. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or the agent responsible to deliver it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is prohibited by the sender and to do so might constitute a violation of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. section 2510-2521. If this communication was received in error we apologize for the intrusion. Please notify us by reply e-mail and delete the original message without reading same. Nothing in this e-mail message shall, in and of itself, create an attorney-client relationship with the sender.

From: Reese J. Henderson, Jr.
Sent: Friday, February 19, 2016 3:55 PM
To: clc-discussion@lists.flabarrpptl.org
Subject: Set off for Payments Made to Downstream Parties

Does anyone have a good case cite (or several) for the proposition that a n upstream party (e.g., owner/general contractor) may deduct payments made to parties further downstream (subs, sub-subs, suppliers, etc.) from the amount owed under their contract with their GC/subcontractor?  The subcontract in my case allows it (and direct payments were in fact made), but I’m looking for a case cite that says the same thing.

Thanks in advance.