Hamilton Const. Co. v. Board of Public Instruction of Dade County
Decision Date | 07 April 1953 |
Citation | 65 So.2d 729 |
Parties | HAMILTON CONST. CO. .v BOARD OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION OF DADE COUNTY. |
Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Anderson & Nadeau, Miami, for appellant.
Edward F. Boardman and Boardman, Bolles & Kates, Miami, for appellees.
On May 1, 1951, Hamilton Construction Co., hereafter called the contractor, entered into a written agreement with the Board of Public Instruction of Dade County, Florida, hereafter called the owner, to construct two school buildings. At the time this contract was entered into the litigation which resulted in the opinion of this Court in the case of Carpenters' District Council, etc. v. Miami Chapter of Associated General Contractors, etc., 55 So.2d 794, was pending. The contract provided the minimum wage scale of all employees under the contract except carpenters and floor layers. Because of the uncertainty of the wage scale of these craftsmen created by the action of the Local Council and the resulting litigation above described, a special clause was inserted in the contract reading as follows:
'Art. A-49 Schedule of Minimum Wages
'(a) Recommended by the Construction Industry Council of Dade County, 1113 Congress Building, Miami, Florida.
'(b) There shall be paid each employee engaged in work under this Contract at the site of the project in the trade or occupation listed on attached sheet, not less than the wage rate set opposite the same. (Refer to the Wage Scale Sheet attached to these General Conditions.)
'Official Construction Wage Rates Dade County, Florida.
'In Force Until Midnight March 31, 1951
'Carpenters (Foremen-add 12 1/2cents or 25cents per hour--see Trade Rules 2.06 1/4'
'The following addition shall be made to the section entitled 'Official Construction Wage Rates Dade County, Florida'.
'This wage scale shall be effective as of January 1, 1951, with the exception of the classifications of Carpenters and Floor Layers.
'Since no decision has reached this office as of this date, the wages paid to Carpenters and Floor Layers will be handled in the following manner:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
International Erectors v. Wilhoit Steel Erectors & R. Serv.
... ... Bielecki, Fla.1957, 97 So.2d 604; Hamilton Const. Co. v. Board of Public Instruction, ... ...
-
Arriaga v. Florida Pacific Farms, L.L.C.
...give effect to the plain language of contracts when that language is clear and unambiguous. See Hamilton Const. Co. v. Bd. of Pub. Instruction of Dade County, 65 So.2d 729, 731 (Fla.1953). Whether a contract provision is ambiguous is a question for the court. See Strama v. Union Fid. Life I......
-
In re Standard Jury Instructions—Contract & Business Cases
...used.SOURCES AND AUTHORITIES FOR 416.15 1. This principle is well-established under Florida law. Hamilton Constr. Co. v. Bd. of Pub. Instruction of Dade Cnty., 65 So.2d 729, 731 (Fla.1953); Langley v. Owens, 52 Fla. 302, 42 So. 457, 460 (1906); Winn–Dixie Stores, Inc. v. 99 Cent Stuff–Trail......
-
Homes & Land Affiliates v. Homes & Loans Magazine
...and unambiguous." Arriaga v. Fla. Pac. Farms, L.L.C., 305 F.3d 1228, 1246 (11th Cir.2002) (citing Hamilton Constr. Co. v. Bd. of Pub. Instruction of Dade County, 65 So.2d 729, 731 (Fla.1953)). Here, the only right created by the plain language of the contract gives Plaintiff the right to re......