Legal Document: L & W SUPPLY CORPORATION Plaintiff vs MULTIPROPIEDADES INVESTMENTS LLC et al Defendant

On April 18, 2024 a Instructions to Clerk of Court was filed involving a dispute between L & W Supply Corporation, and Churchill Funding I Llc, Multipropiedades Investments Llc, for CA Other Real Property Actions 1: $0-$50,000 in the District Court of Lee County.

Preview
Filing # 196508676 E-Filed 04/18/2024 03:07:12 PM
Barry Kalmanson
Professional Association
WWW.BARRYKALMANSON.COM
Attorney at Law
500 N. MAITLAND AVE., SUITE 305
MAITLAND, FLORIDA 32751
407/645-4500
Barry Kalmanson, Esquire
Pamela J. Sugg, Legal Assistant

April 18, 2024

Via ePortal

Clerk of Circuit Court
Lee County Courthouse
P.O. Box 2469
Fort Myers, FL 33902-2469

Re: L & W Supply Corporation, etc. v.
Multipropiedades Investments LLC, et al.
Construction Lien Foreclosure Action
My File No. 317021
Project: Lots 22 and 23, Cape Coral

Dear Sir/Madam:

As you will note, we have requested that the above-referenced construction lien
foreclosure action be filed in Circuit Court as opposed to County Court even though the
amount of the construction lien is less than $50,000.00. The Circuit Court has jurisdiction
of the action pursuantto Chapter 47 and Section 26.012(2)(g), Florida Statutes, and Article
V of the Florida Constitution. The Florida Supreme Court addressed this issue in the case
of Alexdex v. Nachon, 641 So.2d 858 (Fla. 1994) (copy attached) wherein it held that
construction lien foreclosure actions within the County Court's statutorily set limit may be
filed in Circuit Court.

Thank you for your assistance in thismatter”

Sincerely,

Bay on

BK/pjs
Attachment

CADOC\A-MILAL & W Supply 3171021 Multipropiedades 22-23\Correspondence\Less than $50,000. tr. wpd

eFiled Lee County Clerk of Courts Page 1
Alexdex Corp. v. Nachon Enterprises, Inc., 641 So.2d 858 (1994)
49 Fla. L. Weekly S417

Foreclosure of lien on real estate involves
“the title and boundaries of real property,”
t KeyCite Yellow Flag - Negative Treatment and thus, circuit courts have jurisdiction over
Declined to Extend by Sepulveda v. Westport Recovery Corp., Fla.App. 3 lien foreclosures of real estate under statute
Dist., July 9, 2014
641 So.2d 858
conferring exclusive original jurisdiction on
circuit courts in all actions involving title and
Supreme Court of Florida.
boundaries of real property. West's F.S.A. §
ALEXDEX CORPORATION, etc., Petitioner, 26.012(2)(g).
v.
NACHON ENTERPRISES, INC., etc., Respondent.
2] Mechanics’ Liens
No. 81765. @» Nature and Form of Remedy in General
| Action to foreclose mechanics’ lien, like action
Sept. 1, 1994. to foreclose mortgage on land, is action seeking
to judicially convert lien interest, i.e., equitable
Synopsis
interest, against land title to legal title to land and
Contractor filed notice of lis pendens to establish and
in such action result sought by action requires
foreclose construction lien in County Court. Property owner
responded by filing in Circuit Court complaint to show cause trial court to act directly on title to real property.
and to discharge lien. The Circuit Court, Dade County, S.
West's S.A. § 26.012(2)(g).
Peter Capua, J., granted property owner's motion to discharge
lien. Contractor appealed. The District Court of Appeal, Levy,
J., 615 So.2d 245, reversed and remanded with instructions. BI Courts
Property owner sought review. The Supreme Court held Actions to enforce mechanics' liens
that: (1) foreclosure of lien on real estate involves “the title Mechanics' Liens
and boundaries of real property,” and thus, Circuit Court @ Jurisdiction
had jurisdiction over lien foreclosure of real estate under In order for circuit court to have jurisdiction
statute conferring original exclusive jurisdiction on Circuit over lien foreclosure of real estate under statute
Court in all actions involving title or boundaries of real conferring on circuit court original exclusive
property; (2) Circuit Courts, and County Courts within their jurisdiction in all actions involving “the title
statutorily set monetary limit, have concurrent jurisdiction in and boundaries of real property,” action did not
matters of equity; (3) monetary restrictions on County Court's have to involve both title and boundaries of real
jurisdiction applied to amount of construction lien without property, and circuit court had jurisdiction in
consideration to value of securing property in foreclosure action involving one of two categories. West's
action; and (4) construction lien foreclosure action was F, A. § 26.012(2)(g).
properly filed in County Court.
3 Cases that cite this headnote
Decision of District Court of Appeal approved in part;
disapproved in part. [4] Liens
= Enforcement
Shaw, J., concurred in result only and filed opinion.
Lien foreclosures of real estate are matters in
equity.

West Headnotes (16)
15] Courts
Exclusive or Concurrent Jurisdiction
t) Courts
» Actions to enforce mechanics’ liens There is obvious inconsistency with respect to
jurisdiction in actions for lien foreclosures of

eFiled Lee County Clerk of Courts Page 2
Alexdex Corp. v. Nachon Enterprises, Inc., 641 So.2d 858 (1994)
19 Fla. L. Weekly S417

real estate between statute which vests circuit
courts with exclusive original jurisdiction in D] Courts

matters of equity and cases involving title and @ Exclusive or Concurrent Jurisdiction
boundaries of real property and statute which Florida Constitution does not limit equity
vests county courts with equitable jurisdiction jurisdiction exclusively to circuit courts and
within specified monetary limits. West's F.S.A. does not prohibit county court from also
§§ 26.012(2)(a, c, g), 34.01(4). hearing matters of equity; thus, statutes vesting
circuit courts with exclusive original jurisdiction
5 Cases that cite this headnote in matters of equity and statute vesting
county courts with equitable jurisdiction within
[6] Constitutional Law specified monetary limits do not conflict with
@ Establishment, Organization, and Florida Constitution. West's F.S.A. §§ 26.012(2)
Jurisdiction of Courts (a, ¢, g), 34.01(4); West's F.S.A. Const. Art. 5, §§
Courts
5(b), 6(b).
=» In general; nature and source of judicial 6 Cases that cite this headnote
authority
Jurisdiction of courts of state is broadly defined
by State Constitution; however, legislature may [10] Statutes
@> Plain, literal, or clear meaning; ambiguity
further define court's jurisdiction so long as
jurisdiction, as redefined, is not in conflict with Having encountered inconsistency in statutes
Constitution. West's F.S.A. Const. Art. 5, §§ 5(b), when they are read in tandem, court looks to their

6(b). legislative history.

1 Cases that cite this headnote
{11] Statutes
Legislative history
7 Constitutional Law
@» Establishment, Organization, and In looking to legislative history, it is presumed
Jurisdiction of Courts that legislature knows meaning of words
Constitutional Law employed in each statute and that words properly
@ Appellate courts express legislative intent.

Absent constitutional prohibition or restriction,
legislature is free to vest courts with
exclusive, concurrent, original, appellate, or final [12] Courts
jurisdiction. West's F.S.A. Const. Art. 5, §§ 5(b), » Exclusive or Concurrent Jurisdiction
6(b). Courts
@ County courts
1 Cases that cite this headnote
Legislature intended to provide concurrent
equity jurisdiction in circuit and county courts,
[8] Statutes except that equity cases filed in county courts
& Conflict must fall within county courts’ monetary
In case of conflicting statutes, court first jurisdiction, as set by statute. West's F.S.A. §§
addresses constitutionality of statutes; then, if 26.012(2)(a, ¢, g), 34.01(1, 4).
each statute standing alone passes constitutional 6 Cases that cite this headnote
muster, court attempts to reconcile, if possible,
inconsistency.
[13] Statutes
1 Cases that cite this headnote

eFiled Lee County Clerk of Courts Page 3
Alexdex Corp. v. Nachon Enterprises, Inc., 641 So.2d 858 (1994)
19 Fla. L. Weekly S417

@ Construction in View of Effects,
Consequences, or Results *860 Pedro F. Martell of Pedro F. Martell, P.A., Coral

Statute should not be interpreted in manner that
Gables, for respondent.
would deem legislative action useless. Barry Kalmanson of Barry Kalmanson, P.A., Orlando, amicus
curiae for Aluminum Ass'n of Florida, Inc. and Nat. Ass'n of
2 Cases that cite this headnote
Credit Management of Florida, Inc.

Charles R. Gardner and Bruce I. Wiener of Gardner, Shelfer,
[14] Mechanics' Liens
@» Jurisdiction Duggar & Bist, P.A., Tallahassee, and Larry R. Leiby of
Leiby, Ferencik, Libanoff & Brandt, P.A., Miami, amicus
In construction lien foreclosures central focus is
curiae for The Real Property, Probate and Trust Law Section
on actual debt owed and not underlying securing
of The Florida Bar.
property; therefore, monetary restrictions on
county court's jurisdiction will apply in lien R. Hugh Lumpkin and Norman S. Segall of Keith, Mack,
foreclosure actions to amount of lien without Lewis, Cohen & Lumpkin, Miami, amicus curiae for Stewart
consideration to value of securing property. Title Guar. Corp., Attorney's Title Ins. Fund, First American
West's F.S.A. § 34.01(1)(c) 14. Title Ins. Co., Commonwealth Land Title Ins. Corp., the
Florida Land Title Ass'n, Old Republic Nat. Title Ins. Co. and
Avatar Properties, Inc.
15) Courts
¢» Amount claimed or sum recoverable or in Jerry L. Linscott, Frank S. loppolo, Jr. and Harkley R.
dispute Thornton of Baker & Hostetler, Orlando, amicus curiae for
Action to foreclose on construction lien was
American Resort Development Ass'n.
properly filed in county court, where amount Opinion
involved did not exceed county court's monetary
jurisdictional limit. West's F.S.A. §§ 26.012(2)(a, PER CURIAM.
¢, g), 34.01(1, 4); West's F.S.A. Const. Art. 5, §§
5(b), 6(b). Under jurisdiction granted to us by article V, section 3(b)
(3), Florida Constitution, we review Nachon Enterprises,
2 Cases that cite this headnote Inc. v. Alexdex Corp., 615 So.2d 245 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993),
because of its conflict with Publix Super Markets, Inc. v.
Cheesbro Roofing, Inc., 502 So.2d 484 (Fla. Sth DCA 1987).
[16] Courts
# County courts We approve the opinion below and hold that circuit courts,
and county courts within their statutorily set monetary limit,
Lien foreclosures of real property that fall within have concurrent jurisdiction in matters of equity.
county court statutorily set monetary limit may
be filed in either county or circuit court. West's The relevant facts are:
FS.A. §§ 26.012(2)(a, c, g), 34.01(1)(c) 1-4, (4);
West's F.S.A. Const. Art. 5, §§ 5(b), 6(b).
In 1991, appellant [respondent here]
Nachon Enterprises filed a notice
of lis pendens to establish and
Attorneys and Law Firms foreclose a construction lien, against
appellee [petitioner here] Alexdex
*859 Deborah Marks, North Miami, and Richard J. Burton Corporation's property, in the civil
of Geller, Geller, Burton & Garfinkel, Fort Lauderdale, for division of the County Court. Alexdex
petitioner. responded with a complaint to show
cause and to discharge the lien,
which was filed in the Circuit Court.

eFiled Lee County Clerk of Courts Page 4
Alexdex Corp. v. Nachon Enterprises, Inc., 641 So.2d 858 (1994)
19 Fla. L. Weekly S417
Nachon then filed a Motion to Dismiss within the jurisdictional amount of
Alexdex's complaint in the Circuit the county court, except as otherwise
Court setting forth the fact that restricted by the State Constitution or
Nachon had already timely instituted a the laws of Florida.
foreclosure action in the County Court.
Despite the foregoing, in June of 1992,
the Circuit Court granted Alexdex's § 34.01(4), Fla.Stat. (Supp.1990).
Motion to Discharge the lien based
upon the ground that Nachon had not 2] BI Contrary to the court below, we believe that the
properly responded to the Show Cause foreclosure of a lien on real estate involves “the title and
Action. boundaries of real property” as set forth in *861 section
26.012(2)(g). As explained in Publix Super Markets:
Nachon Enter. v. Alexdex Corp., 615 So.2d 245, 246 (Fla. 3d
DCA 1993). The district court of appeal reversed the circuit An action to foreclose a mechanic's
court and reinstated the lien, holding that Nachon properly lien, like an action to foreclose a
filed the foreclosure action in the county court. The court also mortgage on land, is an action seeking
held that construction lien foreclosures are equitable actions to judicially convert a lien interest (an
that do not involve the title and boundaries of real property equitable interest) againsta landtitle to
and such foreclosure actions are to be filed in the county court a legal title to the land and in such an
if the amount involved does not exceed the county court's action the result sought by the action
jurisdictional monetary limit. Petitioner Alexdex contends requires the trial court to act directly on
that jurisdiction lies solely in the circuit court. We disagree. the title to the real property.
fi This case requires us to examine the grants of jurisdiction
under chapters 26 and 34 of the Florida Statutes and resolve
any conflict therein. 502 So.2d at 486.! Therefore, the circuit court would have
jurisdiction over lien foreclosures of real estate under section
The pertinent sections of the statutes read as follows:
26.012(2)(g).

(2) They [circuit courts] shall have exclusive original [4] 15] Notwithstanding, lien foreclosures of real estate
jurisdiction: are also matters in equity. Corbin Well Pump & Supply, Inc.
y. Koon, 482 So.2d 525, 527 (Fla. Sth DCA 1986) (citing
(a) Inall actions at law not cognizable by the county courts; Clark ¥. Hollingsworth, 138 Fla. 2, 188 So. 827 (1939)).
Therefore, there is still an obvious inconsistency between
chapter 26, which vests circuit courts with exclusive original
(c) In all cases in equity including all cases relating to jurisdiction in matters of equity and cases involving the title
juveniles except traffic offenses as provided in chapters 39 and boundaries of real property and chapter 34, which vests
and 316; county courts with equitable jurisdiction within the specified
monetary limits.

16] 17] [8] The jurisdiction of the courts of the state
(g) In all actions involving the title and boundaries of real is broadly defined by our State Constitution; however, the
property. legislature may further define a court's jurisdiction so long
as the jurisdiction, as redefined, is not in conflict with the
§ 26.012(2)(a), (c), (g), Fla.Stat, (1989).
Constitution. State v. Sullivan, 95 Fla. 191, 116 So. 255
(1928). Absent a constitutional prohibition or restriction, the
legislature is free to vest courts with exclusive, concurrent,
Judges of county courts may hear all original, appellate, or final jurisdiction. Sullivan, 95 Fla. at
matters in equity involved in any case

eFiled Lee County Clerk of Courts Page 5
Alexdex Corp. v. Nachon Enterprises, Inc., 641 So.2d 858 (1994)
19 Fla. L. Weekly S417

200, 116 So. at 259. Where we have conflicting statutes as to give each statute its full effect, we conclude that the
in this instance, we first address the constitutionality of the legislature intended to provide concurrent equity jurisdiction
statutes. If each statute, standing alone, passes constitutional in circuit and county courts, except that equity cases filed in
muster, then we attempt to reconcile, if possible, the county courts must fall within the county court's monetary
inconsistency. jurisdiction, as set by statute.? A contrary holding would
ignore the latest legislative expression on the subject and
0p] The controlling constitutional provisions provide that: run counter to our principle enunciated in Sullivan, that a
statute should not be interpreted in a manner that would deem
legislative action useless. 95 Fla. at 207, 116 So. at 261.
(b) JURISDICTION.—The circuit
courts shall have original jurisdiction [14] As a final point, we find that in construction lien
not vested in the county courts, and foreclosures the central focus is on the actual debt owed and
jurisdiction of appeals when provided not the underlying securing property. Therefore, the monetary
by general law. restrictions in section 34.01(1)(c) 1—4. shall apply to the
amount of the lien without consideration to the value of the
securing property.
Art. V, § 5(b), Fla. Const.
15} [16] We approve the decision of the district court of
appeal but only to the extent that it holds that the construction
(b) JURISDICTION.—The county lien foreclosure action was properly filed in the County Court.
courts shall exercise the jurisdiction ‘We disapprove the holding that section 26.012(2)(g) does not
prescribed by general law. give circuit courts jurisdiction over lien foreclosures of real
property. However, we hold that such foreclosures that fall
within the county court's statutorily set limit may be filed in
either County OF circuit court.
Art. V, § 6(b), Fla. Const. We find nothing in these passages
that limits equity jurisdiction exclusively to circuit courts,
It is so ordered.
nor do we find anything that prohibits a county court from
also hearing matters of equity. We conclude therefore that
the statutes, taken separately, do not conflict with our State
Constitution. GRIMES, C.J., and OVERTON, KOGAN and HARDING,
JJ., and McDONALD, Senior Justice, concur.
[10] 1] [12] [13] Having encountered inconsistency
in the statutes when they are read in tandem, we look to SHAW, J., concurs in result only with an opinion.

their legislative history. In so doing, it is presumed that the
SHAW, Justice, concurring in result only.
legislature knows the meaning of the words employed in I concur in the result reached by the majority, but I am
each statute and that the words properly express legislative
troubled by the path they have chosen to reach the conclusion
intent. S.R.G, Corp. v. Department of Revenue, 365 So.2d 687 that county and circuit court have concurrent jurisdiction in
(Fla.1978). With this admonishment in mind, it is clear that
foreclosure actions. The majority's reasoning, to my mind, is
in 1990 the legislature amended chapter 34 to grant limited
badly flawed in parts.
equity jurisdiction to the county courts. Ch. 90-269, § 1 at
1972, Laws of Fla. Chapter 26, which vests circuit courts with
T agree with that portion of the majority opinion which holds
exclusive original jurisdiction, remained unchanged. We now that “the legislature intended to provide concurrent equity
have two statutes that when considered separately are clear, jurisdiction in circuit and county courts, except that equity
precise, and their meanings understandable; yet when taken
cases filed in county courts must fall within the county court's
together they are inconsistent. To accept the proposition that monetary jurisdiction, as set by statute.” Majority op. at 862.
the exclusive jurisdiction given to circuit courts in section
I do not agree, however, with that portion of the majority
26.012 constitutes the “otherwise restricted by the laws of
opinion which concludes that “the foreclosure of a lien on real
Florida” contained in section 34.01(4) would render the
latter section totally meaningless. *862 Therefore, in order

eFiled Lee County Clerk of Courts Page 6
Alexdex Corp. v. Nachon Enterprises, Inc., 641 So.2d 858 (1994)
19 Fla. L. Weekly S417

estate involves ‘the title and boundaries of real property. to
I feel that foreclosure actions do not involve the “boundaries”
Majority op. at 860. to real property and thus fail to meet the “title and boundaries”
requirement of section 26.012(2)(g). Accordingly, circuit
Section 26.012(2), Florida Statutes (1989), provides that courts do not have exclusive original jurisdiction in such
circuit courts “shall have exclusive original jurisdiction matters. Because foreclosure actions are equitable in nature,
[iJn all actions involving the title and boundaries of real such claims may be filed in either county or circuit court
property.” (Emphasis added.) The majority cites Publix Super pursuant to the general equity jurisdiction of those courts, as
Markets, Inc. v. Cheesbro Roofing, Inc., 502 So.2d 484 explained in the majority opinion.
(Fla. 5th DCA 1987), for the proposition that foreclosure
actions involve the “title and boundaries” to real property. Based on the foregoing, I agree with the majority's result that
Nowhere, however, does Publix say this. Rather, the opinion the present action was properly filed in county court and the
merely states the obvious—that a foreclosure action involves circuit court erred in discharging it, but I strongly object to
the “title” to real property. The second half of the statute's the majority's reasoning.
requirement, the “boundaries” provision, is unmentioned.
I find the majority's explanation for its failure *863 to
All Citations
follow the plain meaning of the statute both unpersuasive and
disingenuous. 3
641 So.2d 858, 19 Fla. L. Weekly $417

Footnotes
1 We reject Nachon's contention that in order for the circuit court to have jurisdiction under section 26.012(2)(g), the action
must involve both the title and boundaries of real property. Section 26.012(2)(g), Florida Statutes (Supp.1972), originally
read that circuit courts had exclusive jurisdiction “in all actions involving the title, boundaries, or right of possession of real
property.” At that time, the circuit court obviously had jurisdiction for actions involving any one of the three categories. In
1974, the statute was amended to move the jurisdiction over actions involving the right of possession of real property to
the county court. Ch. 74-209, § 1, Laws of Fla. By virtue of simply removing the reference to the right of possession of
real property from section 26.012(2)(g), the legislature clearly evinced no intention to require that an action involve both
title and boundaries in order for the circuit court to have jurisdiction.
The monetary jurisdiction of county courts is:
(1) County courts shall have original jurisdiction:
(a) In all misdemeanor cases not cognizable by the circuit courts;
(b) Of all violations of municipal and county ordinances; and
(c) As to causes of action accruing:
1. Before July 1, 1980, of all actions at law in which the matter in controversy does not exceed the sum of $2,500,
exclusive of interest, costs, and attorney's fees, except those within the exclusive jurisdiction of the circuit courts.
2. On or after July 1, 1980, of all actions at law in which the matter in controversy does not exceed the sum of $5,000,
exclusive of interest, costs, and attorney's fees, except those within the exclusive jurisdiction of the circuit courts.
3. On or after July 1, 1990, of actions at law in which the matter in controversy does not exceed the sum of $10,000,
exclusive of interest, costs, and attorney's fees, except those within the exclusive jurisdiction of the circuit courts.
4. On or after July 1, 1992, of actions at law in which the matter in controversy does not exceed the sum of $15,000,
exclusive of interest, costs, and attorney's fees, except those within the exclusive jurisdiction of the circuit courts.
§ 34.01(1), Fla.Stat. (Supp.1990).
The statute, which originally read that circuit courts had exclusive jurisdiction in “all actions involving the title, boundaries,
or right of possession of real property,” was changed in 1972 to provide that circuit courts have exclusive jurisdiction in “all
actions involving the title and boundaries of real property.” The practical effect of the amendment is twofold: It removes
from the exclusive jurisdiction of the circuit courts actions involving right of possession of real property, and it gives circuit
courts exclusive jurisdiction in all actions involving the title and boundaries of real property. The plain meaning of the term
“and” in the amended phrase ‘title and boundaries’ is conjunctive, and we thus need look no further for legislative intent.
Title and boundaries is a sine qua non of exclusive jurisdiction. The majority's attempt to say otherwise in footnote 1 of
its opinion strikes me as an attempt to argue that when the legislature says white it really means black.

eFiled Lee County Clerk of Courts Page 7
Alexdex Corp. v. Nachon Enterprises, Inc., 641 So.2d 858 (1994)
19 Fla. L. Weekly S417

4 Conversely, | feel that if foreclosure actions did meet the “title and boundaries” requirement of section 26.012(2)(g) then
circuit courts would have exclusive jurisdiction in such matters and foreclosure claims could not be filed in county court.
Both county and circuit courts would have concurrent jurisdiction in other equitable actions. | differ from the majority on
this point.

eFiled Lee County Clerk of Courts Page 8

Case Info

Judge

Joseph C Fuller Track Judge’s New Case

Case No.

(Subscribe to View)

Document Filed Date

April 18, 2024

Case Filing Date

April 18, 2024

County

Parties

For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.

Document for L & W SUPPLY CORPORATION Plaintiff vs MULTIPROPIEDADES INVESTMENTS LLC et al Defendant

Preview

Related Topics

Case Info

Parties