5D06-1722 5D06-3312 Langley v. Knowles

State: Florida

Court: Florida Fifth District Court

Docket No: 5D06-1722

Case Date: 06/25/2007

Preview:IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT JANUARY TERM 2007

VICTOR LANGLEY, Appellant, v. CHRIS KNOWLES AND SANDRA KNOWLES, Appellees. ________________________________/ Opinion filed June 29, 2007 Appeal from the Circuit Court for Orange County, Reginald Whitehead, Judge. Jamie B. Moses and R. Gavin MacKinnon, of Fisher, Rushmer, Werrenrath, Dickson, Talley & Dunlap, P.A., Orlando, for Appellant. Douglas W. Ackerman and April A. Atkins, of Kirwin Norris, P.A., Winter Park, for Appellees. EVANDER, J. Langley appeals a final summary judgment entered in favor of the Knowleses on Count I of his complaint -- a count requesting enforcement of a construction lien. He also appeals a final judgment awarding the Knowleses attorney's fees and costs. We find the trial court misapplied the "substantial performance" doctrine and reverse both final judgments. Case No. 5D06-1722 5D06-3312 CORRECTED OPINION

Langley and the Knowleses entered into a written contract, whereby Langley agreed to perform certain masonry work toward the construction of a two -story garage/mother-in-law suite on the Knowleses' property. The Knowleses agreed to pay Langley the sum of $11,235 for the project. Early in the project, Langley realized he had made a mistake. He had

constructed a concrete footer one foot shorter than the length specified in the plans. Langley informed the Knowleses of his error and proposed a method to resolve the problem. The Knowleses found Langley's initial proposal to be unacceptable. There is a dispute as to what occurred next. The Knowleses allege Langley refused to comply with their directive to redo the work so as to ensure compliance with the plans. Langley contends the parties were negotiating a solution to correct the situation when the Knowleses wrongfully terminated the contract by employing a new contractor. The Knowleses requested a final invoice from Langley. Langley delivered an invoice for $2,906.76. This figure purported to represent the value of his labor and materials less the cost of correcting his error. The Knowleses paid Langley $1,102.12 as the final payment. Langley filed a lien against the Knowleses' property for $1,804.64 and subsequently filed a two-count complaint in the circuit court. Count I was for

enforcement of the lien1 and Count II was for breach of contract. The Knowleses filed an answer denying that they owed Langley any monies. As affirmative defenses, the Knowleses alleged Langley had breached the contract, had failed to substantially perform the contract, and had filed a fraudulent lien.
1

The Knowleses also filed a two-

Download 5D06-1722 5D06-3312 Langley v. Knowles.pdf