Empathy List Archives

BS

Brian Solomon

Thu, Jan 3, 2019 7:37 PM

I know that raising the failure to file a final contractor's affidavit has to be pled with particularity. On the flip side, is there any support for the proposition that a lienor in privity's failure to specifically plead compliance with serving the final contractor's affidavit within five days, fails to state a cause of action.

Volk Law Offices, P.A.
Brian D. Solomon, Esquire
One Harbor Place
1901 S. Harbor City Blvd.
Suite 700
Melbourne, FL 32901
321.726.8338 telephone
bsolomon@volklawoffices.com mailto:bsolomon@volklawoffices.com

Board Certified in Construction Law

[cid:image001.jpg@01D11BB2.EEFB99D0]http://volklawoffices.com/

This email is intended only for the use of the party to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, or protected by law. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, copying or distribution of this email or its contents is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the message and deleting it from your computer.

Internet communications are not assured to be secure or clear of inaccuracies as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses. Therefore, we do not accept responsibility for any errors or omissions that are present in this email, or any attachment, that have arisen as a result of email transmission.

I know that raising the failure to file a final contractor's affidavit has to be pled with particularity. On the flip side, is there any support for the proposition that a lienor in privity's failure to specifically plead compliance with serving the final contractor's affidavit within five days, fails to state a cause of action. Volk Law Offices, P.A. Brian D. Solomon, Esquire One Harbor Place 1901 S. Harbor City Blvd. Suite 700 Melbourne, FL 32901 321.726.8338 telephone bsolomon@volklawoffices.com<mailto:bsolomon@volklawoffices.com> Board Certified in Construction Law [cid:image001.jpg@01D11BB2.EEFB99D0]<http://volklawoffices.com/> This email is intended only for the use of the party to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, or protected by law. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, copying or distribution of this email or its contents is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the message and deleting it from your computer. Internet communications are not assured to be secure or clear of inaccuracies as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses. Therefore, we do not accept responsibility for any errors or omissions that are present in this email, or any attachment, that have arisen as a result of email transmission.

BP

Bruce Partington

Thu, Jan 3, 2019 7:49 PM

I've wondered about that before, and the question turns I think on whether service of the CFA is an "element" of the cause of action, or merely a "condition precedent" which can be pled generally. I don't think there is a clear answer, but I always plead it. I am not aware of any definitive authority one way or the other.

There is argument that it's an element since the statute says: "The contractor shall have no lien or right of action against the owner for labor, services, or materials furnished under the direct contract while in default for not giving the owner the affidavit" (which smells like an "element" to me); but it also says: "The contractor shall execute the affidavit and deliver it to the owner at least 5 days before instituting an action as a prerequisite to the institution of any action to enforce his or her lien under this chapter" (which smells like a condition precedent to me).

Another of the vagaries of the lien law nicely explored in the current edition of the Fla. Bar Journal in Leonard Klingen's article.

Bruce D Partington | Shareholder
bpartington@clarkpartington.com | (850) 432-1399

CLARK PARTINGTON
Office: (850) 434-9200 | Fax: (850) 432-7340
125 East Intendencia Street, 4th Floor
Pensacola, Florida 32502
clarkpartington.comhttp://clarkpartington.com/

[cid:SignatureLogo_57e3dfc0-9904-44ee-93b6-c3b57df5d8d8.jpg]

[cid:Facebook_55598884-7995-4d93-92d3-5101d580d70c.png]https://www.facebook.com/ClarkPartington/ [cid:LinkedIn_57c89113-2875-479d-9fdd-fd3a2a809f98.png] https://www.linkedin.com/company/2250553/admin/ [cid:Twitter_216c94ca-a91c-458c-ad76-295500e4747c.png] https://twitter.com/ClarkPartington [cid:Instagram_c437b822-13ce-4d58-87bc-212014b134fa.png] https://www.instagram.com/clarkpartington/

From: clc-discussion-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:clc-discussion-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Brian Solomon
Sent: Thursday, January 3, 2019 1:38 PM
To: clc-discussion@lists.flabarrpptl.org
Subject: [CLC-Discussion] Final Contractor's affidavit

I know that raising the failure to file a final contractor's affidavit has to be pled with particularity. On the flip side, is there any support for the proposition that a lienor in privity's failure to specifically plead compliance with serving the final contractor's affidavit within five days, fails to state a cause of action.

Volk Law Offices, P.A.
Brian D. Solomon, Esquire
One Harbor Place
1901 S. Harbor City Blvd.
Suite 700
Melbourne, FL 32901
321.726.8338 telephone
bsolomon@volklawoffices.com mailto:bsolomon@volklawoffices.com

Board Certified in Construction Law

[cid:image001.jpg@01D11BB2.EEFB99D0]http://volklawoffices.com/

This email is intended only for the use of the party to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, or protected by law. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, copying or distribution of this email or its contents is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the message and deleting it from your computer.

Internet communications are not assured to be secure or clear of inaccuracies as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses. Therefore, we do not accept responsibility for any errors or omissions that are present in this email, or any attachment, that have arisen as a result of email transmission.

I've wondered about that before, and the question turns I think on whether service of the CFA is an "element" of the cause of action, or merely a "condition precedent" which can be pled generally. I don't think there is a clear answer, but I always plead it. I am not aware of any definitive authority one way or the other. There is argument that it's an element since the statute says: "The contractor shall have no lien or right of action against the owner for labor, services, or materials furnished under the direct contract while in default for not giving the owner the affidavit" (which smells like an "element" to me); but it also says: "The contractor shall execute the affidavit and deliver it to the owner at least 5 days before instituting an action as a prerequisite to the institution of any action to enforce his or her lien under this chapter" (which smells like a condition precedent to me). Another of the vagaries of the lien law nicely explored in the current edition of the Fla. Bar Journal in Leonard Klingen's article. Bruce D Partington | Shareholder bpartington@clarkpartington.com | (850) 432-1399 CLARK PARTINGTON Office: (850) 434-9200 | Fax: (850) 432-7340 125 East Intendencia Street, 4th Floor Pensacola, Florida 32502 clarkpartington.com<http://clarkpartington.com/> [cid:SignatureLogo_57e3dfc0-9904-44ee-93b6-c3b57df5d8d8.jpg] [cid:Facebook_55598884-7995-4d93-92d3-5101d580d70c.png]<https://www.facebook.com/ClarkPartington/> [cid:LinkedIn_57c89113-2875-479d-9fdd-fd3a2a809f98.png] <https://www.linkedin.com/company/2250553/admin/> [cid:Twitter_216c94ca-a91c-458c-ad76-295500e4747c.png] <https://twitter.com/ClarkPartington> [cid:Instagram_c437b822-13ce-4d58-87bc-212014b134fa.png] <https://www.instagram.com/clarkpartington/> From: clc-discussion-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:clc-discussion-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Brian Solomon Sent: Thursday, January 3, 2019 1:38 PM To: clc-discussion@lists.flabarrpptl.org Subject: [CLC-Discussion] Final Contractor's affidavit I know that raising the failure to file a final contractor's affidavit has to be pled with particularity. On the flip side, is there any support for the proposition that a lienor in privity's failure to specifically plead compliance with serving the final contractor's affidavit within five days, fails to state a cause of action. Volk Law Offices, P.A. Brian D. Solomon, Esquire One Harbor Place 1901 S. Harbor City Blvd. Suite 700 Melbourne, FL 32901 321.726.8338 telephone bsolomon@volklawoffices.com<mailto:bsolomon@volklawoffices.com> Board Certified in Construction Law [cid:image001.jpg@01D11BB2.EEFB99D0]<http://volklawoffices.com/> This email is intended only for the use of the party to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, or protected by law. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, copying or distribution of this email or its contents is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the message and deleting it from your computer. Internet communications are not assured to be secure or clear of inaccuracies as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses. Therefore, we do not accept responsibility for any errors or omissions that are present in this email, or any attachment, that have arisen as a result of email transmission.

CB

Charles B. Hernicz, Esq.

Fri, Jan 4, 2019 1:46 PM

I have not updated the research lately, but the older case law clearly
supports a directed verdict for noncompliance with the final affidavit
requirement-don't think anything has changed.

Charles B. Hernicz, Esq.

Board Certified in Construction Law by The Florida Bar

Hernicz Legal Services, P.L.
1460 Wood Row Way
Wellington, FL 33414
Telephone: (561) 753-7511
Facsimile: (561) 753-7082
Chernicz@HerniczLegal.com

From: clc-discussion-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org
clc-discussion-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org On Behalf Of Bruce Partington
Sent: Thursday, January 3, 2019 2:50 PM
To: 'Brian Solomon' bsolomon@volklawoffices.com;
clc-discussion@lists.flabarrpptl.org
Subject: Re: [CLC-Discussion] Final Contractor's affidavit

I've wondered about that before, and the question turns I think on whether
service of the CFA is an "element" of the cause of action, or merely a
"condition precedent" which can be pled generally. I don't think there is a
clear answer, but I always plead it. I am not aware of any definitive
authority one way or the other.

There is argument that it's an element since the statute says: "The
contractor shall have no lien or right of action against the owner for
labor, services, or materials furnished under the direct contract while in
default for not giving the owner the affidavit" (which smells like an
"element" to me); but it also says: "The contractor shall execute the
affidavit and deliver it to the owner at least 5 days before instituting an
action as a prerequisite to the institution of any action to enforce his or
her lien under this chapter" (which smells like a condition precedent to
me).

Another of the vagaries of the lien law nicely explored in the current
edition of the Fla. Bar Journal in Leonard Klingen's article.

Bruce D Partington | Shareholder
bpartington@clarkpartington.com mailto:bpartington@clarkpartington.com |
(850) 432-1399

CLARK PARTINGTON
Office: (850) 434-9200 | Fax: (850) 432-7340
125 East Intendencia Street, 4th Floor
Pensacola, Florida 32502
http://clarkpartington.com/ clarkpartington.com

https://www.facebook.com/ClarkPartington/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/2250553/admin/
https://twitter.com/ClarkPartington
https://www.instagram.com/clarkpartington/

From: clc-discussion-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org
mailto:clc-discussion-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org
[mailto:clc-discussion-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Brian
Solomon
Sent: Thursday, January 3, 2019 1:38 PM
To: clc-discussion@lists.flabarrpptl.org
mailto:clc-discussion@lists.flabarrpptl.org
Subject: [CLC-Discussion] Final Contractor's affidavit

I know that raising the failure to file a final contractor's affidavit has
to be pled with particularity. On the flip side, is there any support for
the proposition that a lienor in privity's failure to specifically plead
compliance with serving the final contractor's affidavit within five days,
fails to state a cause of action.

Volk Law Offices, P.A.

Brian D. Solomon, Esquire

One Harbor Place

1901 S. Harbor City Blvd.

Suite 700

Melbourne, FL 32901

321.726.8338 telephone

bsolomon@volklawoffices.com mailto:bsolomon@volklawoffices.com

Board Certified in Construction Law

http://volklawoffices.com/

This email is intended only for the use of the party to which it is
addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, or
protected by law. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby
notified that any dissemination, copying or distribution of this email or
its contents is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in
error, please notify us immediately by replying to the message and deleting
it from your computer.

Internet communications are not assured to be secure or clear of
inaccuracies as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost,
destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses. Therefore, we do
not accept responsibility for any errors or omissions that are present in
this email, or any attachment, that have arisen as a result of email
transmission.

I have not updated the research lately, but the older case law clearly supports a directed verdict for noncompliance with the final affidavit requirement-don't think anything has changed. Charles B. Hernicz, Esq. Board Certified in Construction Law by The Florida Bar Hernicz Legal Services, P.L. 1460 Wood Row Way Wellington, FL 33414 Telephone: (561) 753-7511 Facsimile: (561) 753-7082 Chernicz@HerniczLegal.com From: clc-discussion-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org <clc-discussion-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org> On Behalf Of Bruce Partington Sent: Thursday, January 3, 2019 2:50 PM To: 'Brian Solomon' <bsolomon@volklawoffices.com>; clc-discussion@lists.flabarrpptl.org Subject: Re: [CLC-Discussion] Final Contractor's affidavit I've wondered about that before, and the question turns I think on whether service of the CFA is an "element" of the cause of action, or merely a "condition precedent" which can be pled generally. I don't think there is a clear answer, but I always plead it. I am not aware of any definitive authority one way or the other. There is argument that it's an element since the statute says: "The contractor shall have no lien or right of action against the owner for labor, services, or materials furnished under the direct contract while in default for not giving the owner the affidavit" (which smells like an "element" to me); but it also says: "The contractor shall execute the affidavit and deliver it to the owner at least 5 days before instituting an action as a prerequisite to the institution of any action to enforce his or her lien under this chapter" (which smells like a condition precedent to me). Another of the vagaries of the lien law nicely explored in the current edition of the Fla. Bar Journal in Leonard Klingen's article. Bruce D Partington | Shareholder bpartington@clarkpartington.com <mailto:bpartington@clarkpartington.com> | (850) 432-1399 CLARK PARTINGTON Office: (850) 434-9200 | Fax: (850) 432-7340 125 East Intendencia Street, 4th Floor Pensacola, Florida 32502 <http://clarkpartington.com/> clarkpartington.com <https://www.facebook.com/ClarkPartington/> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/2250553/admin/> <https://twitter.com/ClarkPartington> <https://www.instagram.com/clarkpartington/> From: clc-discussion-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org <mailto:clc-discussion-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org> [mailto:clc-discussion-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Brian Solomon Sent: Thursday, January 3, 2019 1:38 PM To: clc-discussion@lists.flabarrpptl.org <mailto:clc-discussion@lists.flabarrpptl.org> Subject: [CLC-Discussion] Final Contractor's affidavit I know that raising the failure to file a final contractor's affidavit has to be pled with particularity. On the flip side, is there any support for the proposition that a lienor in privity's failure to specifically plead compliance with serving the final contractor's affidavit within five days, fails to state a cause of action. Volk Law Offices, P.A. Brian D. Solomon, Esquire One Harbor Place 1901 S. Harbor City Blvd. Suite 700 Melbourne, FL 32901 321.726.8338 telephone bsolomon@volklawoffices.com <mailto:bsolomon@volklawoffices.com> Board Certified in Construction Law <http://volklawoffices.com/> This email is intended only for the use of the party to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, or protected by law. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, copying or distribution of this email or its contents is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the message and deleting it from your computer. Internet communications are not assured to be secure or clear of inaccuracies as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses. Therefore, we do not accept responsibility for any errors or omissions that are present in this email, or any attachment, that have arisen as a result of email transmission.

RM

Rothfeldt, Michael G.

Fri, Jan 4, 2019 2:08 PM

Rivera (attached) found Fort to be abrogated by Ingersoll v. Hoffman, 589 So. 2d 233 (Fla. 1991) on the grounds that the defendant must specifically plead non-compliance with a condition precedent (e.g., CFA), and failure to do so can waive the defense. Notably, the lienor in Rivera alleged "all conditions precedent to the filing of this action have occurred, have bene performed, or have otherwise been waived or excused." This suggests compliance may not need to be specifically pled.

From: clc-discussion-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:clc-discussion-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Charles B. Hernicz, Esq.
Sent: Friday, January 04, 2019 8:46 AM
To: 'Bruce Partington'; 'Brian Solomon'; clc-discussion@lists.flabarrpptl.org
Subject: Re: [CLC-Discussion] Final Contractor's affidavit

I have not updated the research lately, but the older case law clearly supports a directed verdict for noncompliance with the final affidavit requirement-don't think anything has changed.

Charles B. Hernicz, Esq.
Board Certified in Construction Law by The Florida Bar
Hernicz Legal Services, P.L.
1460 Wood Row Way
Wellington, FL 33414
Telephone: (561) 753-7511
Facsimile: (561) 753-7082
Chernicz@HerniczLegal.com

From: clc-discussion-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org clc-discussion-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org On Behalf Of Bruce Partington
Sent: Thursday, January 3, 2019 2:50 PM
To: 'Brian Solomon' bsolomon@volklawoffices.com; clc-discussion@lists.flabarrpptl.org
Subject: Re: [CLC-Discussion] Final Contractor's affidavit

I've wondered about that before, and the question turns I think on whether service of the CFA is an "element" of the cause of action, or merely a "condition precedent" which can be pled generally. I don't think there is a clear answer, but I always plead it. I am not aware of any definitive authority one way or the other.

There is argument that it's an element since the statute says: "The contractor shall have no lien or right of action against the owner for labor, services, or materials furnished under the direct contract while in default for not giving the owner the affidavit" (which smells like an "element" to me); but it also says: "The contractor shall execute the affidavit and deliver it to the owner at least 5 days before instituting an action as a prerequisite to the institution of any action to enforce his or her lien under this chapter" (which smells like a condition precedent to me).

Another of the vagaries of the lien law nicely explored in the current edition of the Fla. Bar Journal in Leonard Klingen's article.

Bruce D Partington | Shareholder
bpartington@clarkpartington.com mailto:bpartington@clarkpartington.com | (850) 432-1399

CLARK PARTINGTON
Office: (850) 434-9200 | Fax: (850) 432-7340
125 East Intendencia Street, 4th Floor
Pensacola, Florida 32502
clarkpartington.comhttp://clarkpartington.com/

[cid:image002.jpg@01D4A40B.DD437C50]

[cid:image003.png@01D4A40B.DD437C50]https://www.facebook.com/ClarkPartington/ [cid:image004.png@01D4A40B.DD437C50] https://www.linkedin.com/company/2250553/admin/ [cid:image005.png@01D4A40B.DD437C50] https://twitter.com/ClarkPartington [cid:image006.png@01D4A40B.DD437C50] https://www.instagram.com/clarkpartington/

From: clc-discussion-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org mailto:clc-discussion-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:clc-discussion-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Brian Solomon
Sent: Thursday, January 3, 2019 1:38 PM
To: clc-discussion@lists.flabarrpptl.org mailto:clc-discussion@lists.flabarrpptl.org
Subject: [CLC-Discussion] Final Contractor's affidavit

I know that raising the failure to file a final contractor's affidavit has to be pled with particularity. On the flip side, is there any support for the proposition that a lienor in privity's failure to specifically plead compliance with serving the final contractor's affidavit within five days, fails to state a cause of action.

Volk Law Offices, P.A.
Brian D. Solomon, Esquire
One Harbor Place
1901 S. Harbor City Blvd.
Suite 700
Melbourne, FL 32901
321.726.8338 telephone
bsolomon@volklawoffices.com mailto:bsolomon@volklawoffices.com

Board Certified in Construction Law

[cid:image001.jpg@01D11BB2.EEFB99D0]http://volklawoffices.com/

This email is intended only for the use of the party to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, or protected by law. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, copying or distribution of this email or its contents is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the message and deleting it from your computer.

Internet communications are not assured to be secure or clear of inaccuracies as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses. Therefore, we do not accept responsibility for any errors or omissions that are present in this email, or any attachment, that have arisen as a result of email transmission.

Rivera (attached) found Fort to be abrogated by Ingersoll v. Hoffman, 589 So. 2d 233 (Fla. 1991) on the grounds that the defendant must specifically plead non-compliance with a condition precedent (e.g., CFA), and failure to do so can waive the defense. Notably, the lienor in Rivera alleged "all conditions precedent to the filing of this action have occurred, have bene performed, or have otherwise been waived or excused." This suggests compliance may not need to be specifically pled. From: clc-discussion-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:clc-discussion-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Charles B. Hernicz, Esq. Sent: Friday, January 04, 2019 8:46 AM To: 'Bruce Partington'; 'Brian Solomon'; clc-discussion@lists.flabarrpptl.org Subject: Re: [CLC-Discussion] Final Contractor's affidavit I have not updated the research lately, but the older case law clearly supports a directed verdict for noncompliance with the final affidavit requirement-don't think anything has changed. Charles B. Hernicz, Esq. Board Certified in Construction Law by The Florida Bar Hernicz Legal Services, P.L. 1460 Wood Row Way Wellington, FL 33414 Telephone: (561) 753-7511 Facsimile: (561) 753-7082 Chernicz@HerniczLegal.com From: clc-discussion-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org <clc-discussion-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org> On Behalf Of Bruce Partington Sent: Thursday, January 3, 2019 2:50 PM To: 'Brian Solomon' <bsolomon@volklawoffices.com>; clc-discussion@lists.flabarrpptl.org Subject: Re: [CLC-Discussion] Final Contractor's affidavit I've wondered about that before, and the question turns I think on whether service of the CFA is an "element" of the cause of action, or merely a "condition precedent" which can be pled generally. I don't think there is a clear answer, but I always plead it. I am not aware of any definitive authority one way or the other. There is argument that it's an element since the statute says: "The contractor shall have no lien or right of action against the owner for labor, services, or materials furnished under the direct contract while in default for not giving the owner the affidavit" (which smells like an "element" to me); but it also says: "The contractor shall execute the affidavit and deliver it to the owner at least 5 days before instituting an action as a prerequisite to the institution of any action to enforce his or her lien under this chapter" (which smells like a condition precedent to me). Another of the vagaries of the lien law nicely explored in the current edition of the Fla. Bar Journal in Leonard Klingen's article. Bruce D Partington | Shareholder bpartington@clarkpartington.com<mailto:bpartington@clarkpartington.com> | (850) 432-1399 CLARK PARTINGTON Office: (850) 434-9200 | Fax: (850) 432-7340 125 East Intendencia Street, 4th Floor Pensacola, Florida 32502 clarkpartington.com<http://clarkpartington.com/> [cid:image002.jpg@01D4A40B.DD437C50] [cid:image003.png@01D4A40B.DD437C50]<https://www.facebook.com/ClarkPartington/> [cid:image004.png@01D4A40B.DD437C50] <https://www.linkedin.com/company/2250553/admin/> [cid:image005.png@01D4A40B.DD437C50] <https://twitter.com/ClarkPartington> [cid:image006.png@01D4A40B.DD437C50] <https://www.instagram.com/clarkpartington/> From: clc-discussion-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org<mailto:clc-discussion-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org> [mailto:clc-discussion-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Brian Solomon Sent: Thursday, January 3, 2019 1:38 PM To: clc-discussion@lists.flabarrpptl.org<mailto:clc-discussion@lists.flabarrpptl.org> Subject: [CLC-Discussion] Final Contractor's affidavit I know that raising the failure to file a final contractor's affidavit has to be pled with particularity. On the flip side, is there any support for the proposition that a lienor in privity's failure to specifically plead compliance with serving the final contractor's affidavit within five days, fails to state a cause of action. Volk Law Offices, P.A. Brian D. Solomon, Esquire One Harbor Place 1901 S. Harbor City Blvd. Suite 700 Melbourne, FL 32901 321.726.8338 telephone bsolomon@volklawoffices.com<mailto:bsolomon@volklawoffices.com> Board Certified in Construction Law [cid:image001.jpg@01D11BB2.EEFB99D0]<http://volklawoffices.com/> This email is intended only for the use of the party to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, or protected by law. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, copying or distribution of this email or its contents is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the message and deleting it from your computer. Internet communications are not assured to be secure or clear of inaccuracies as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses. Therefore, we do not accept responsibility for any errors or omissions that are present in this email, or any attachment, that have arisen as a result of email transmission.