Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co. v. Jelac Corp., 4-86-2919
| Decision Date | 15 April 1987 |
| Docket Number | No. 4-86-2919,4-86-2919 |
| Citation | 505 So.2d 37,12 Fla. L. Weekly 1038 |
| Parties | 12 Fla. L. Weekly 1038 The AETNA CASUALTY & SURETY COMPANY, Appellant, v. JELAC CORPORATION, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
James L. Simon of Bogin, Munns, Munns & Simon, Orlando, for appellant.
Stephen L. Shochet of De Renzo and Mehok, Boca Raton, for appellee.
This is a non-final appeal of an order denying Aetna Casualty & Surety Company's motion to dismiss, to abate and to compel arbitration. This court has jurisdiction pursuant to Rule 9.130(a)(3)(C)(v), Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure.
Jelac Corporation, as subcontractor, entered into a standard AlA subcontract with Prime Contractors, Inc., as contractor, for work on a project in Boynton Beach. Article 13 provides for arbitration of all disputes. Subparagraph 13.2 provides specifically:
13.2 Except by written consent of the person or entity sought to be joined, no arbitration arising out of or relating to the Contract Documents shall include, by consolidation, joinder or in any other manner, any person or entity not a party to the Agreement under which such arbitration arises, unless it is shown at the time the demand for arbitration is filed that (1) such person or entity is substantially involved in a common question of fact or law, (2) the presence of such person or entity is required if complete relief is to be accorded in the arbitration, (3) the interest or responsibility of such person or entity in the matter is not insubstantial, and (4) such person or entity is not the Architect, his employee or his consultant.
(Emphasis added.)
On April 18, 1985, Aetna and Prime executed a dual obligee performance and payment bond covering the Boynton Beach project.
In August, 1986, Jelac filed suit against Aetna to recover on the bond for alleged nonpayment by Prime on their contract. Prime was not joined in the suit. Aetna filed a motion to dismiss claiming the suit should be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction because of the arbitration clause in the subcontract between Jelac and Prime.
We hold that Aetna does not have the right under the contract between Jelac and Prime to demand arbitration. We find particularly that subparagraph 13.2 precludes Aetna from asserting any such contract rights. We also believe Aetna is at most an incidental beneficiary to the contract and thus has no right to enforce the contract's arbitration provision. As stated in Maryland Casualty Co. v....
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hartford Acc. and Indem. Co. v. Scarlett Harbor Associates Ltd. Partnership
...the same result that we do, they do not necessarily employ the same reasoning that we have employed. See Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. Jelac Co., 505 So.2d 37 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1987); Maryland Casualty Co. v. State Dept. of General Services, 489 So.2d 57 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.), rev. dismissed, ......
-
Florida Mun. Power v. Florida Power and Light
...directly benefit the third party or a class of persons to which that party claims to belong." Id. (citing Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. Jelac Corp., 505 So.2d 37 (4th DCA 1987)). After reviewing the joint motion of the DOJ, the NRC Staff, and FPL, and the License Conditions, the Court conc......
-
Riscorp, Inc. v. Norman
...Warren v. Monahan Beaches Jewelry Ctr., Inc., 548 So.2d 870, 872 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1989); Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co. v. Jelac Corp., 505 So.2d 37 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1987); Maryland Cas. Co. v. State Dep't of Gen. Servs., 489 So.2d 57 In support of its argument that Albrecht and the Trust are not th......
-
Biscayne Investment Group, Ltd. v. Guarantee Management Services, Inc., Case No. 3D04-1354 (FL 4/6/2005)
...intent to primarily and directly benefit the third party or a class of persons to which that party belongs. Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co. v. Jelac Corp., 505 So. 2d 37 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987); Security Mut. Cas. Ins. Co. v. Pacura, 402 So. 2d 1266 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981). To find the requisite intent, it mu......
-
Contract cases
...Inc., 604 So.2d 17, 18 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992), cause dismissed , 613 So.2d 5 (Fla. 1993). 10. Aetna Casualty & Surety, Co. v. Jelac Corp., 505 So.2d 37, 38 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987). 11. Weimar v. Yacht Club Point Estates, Inc., 223 So.2d 100, 102 (Fla. 4th DCA 1969). §3:40.1.5 Elements of Cause of ......