Liddle v. AF Dozer, Inc., 4D99-3454.
| Decision Date | 22 November 2000 |
| Docket Number | No. 4D99-3454.,4D99-3454. |
| Citation | 777 So.2d 421 |
| Parties | Brooke D. LIDDLE and Diane Kroll Liddle, his wife, Appellants, v. A.F. DOZER, INC., Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Adam G. Heffner of Schneider & Heffner, Boca Raton, for appellants.
Diane H. Tutt and Sharon C. Degnan of Diane H. Tutt, P.A., Plantation, for appellee.
Appellants, Brooke D. Liddle and Diane Kroll Liddle (Liddles)1 appeal a Final Judgment entered in favor of appellee, A.F. Dozer, Inc. (Dozer), for foreclosure of a mechanic's lien. We affirm the trial court's rulings concerning Dozer's entitlement to recovery, but remand to require Dozer to elect a remedy.
In two of the three counts of its Amended Complaint, Dozer sought relief against the Liddles based on foreclosure of its mechanic's lien and foreclosure of an equitable lien based on unjust enrichment. The matter was set for jury trial. After the close of all the evidence and shortly before the parties' closing arguments, the Liddles requested the court to order Dozer to elect a remedy, i.e., foreclosure of a statutory lien, pursuant to section 713, Florida Statutes (1997), or foreclosure of a mechanic's lien based on unjust enrichment. The trial judge did not rule on the motion before the end of trial and entered judgment in favor of Dozer under both theories of recovery.2
In Goldstein v. Serio, 566 So.2d 1338, 1339 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990)(quoting Security & Inv. Corp. of the Palm Beaches v. Droege, 529 So.2d 799 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988)), we discussed application of the doctrine of election of remedies:
The doctrine of election of remedies is a technical rule of procedure or judicial administration, used by the courts to prevent double recoveries for a single wrong. Application of the doctrine can serve as an instrument of injustice when an election of a remedy turns out to be unavailable, and yet it is held to bar pursuit of another remedy. Prior to imposing the doctrine, courts should carefully consider the facts of each case. (citations omitted). If the two remedies are inconsistent or mutually exclusive, so that one implies negation of the underlying facts necessary for the other, then the mere choice of one remedy and, certainly, the pursuit of one remedy to judgment, operates as an election. [See United Companies Fin. Corp. v. Bergelson, 573 So.2d 887, 888 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990)
]. However, if the remedies are concurrent or cumulative, and logically can coexist on the same facts, the doctrine of election does not apply until the injured party has received full satisfaction for his [or her] injuries. Or, if the remedies address different and distinct rights or redress different wrongs, the doctrine of election has no application.
(Citations omitted). An election between mutually exclusive remedies can be made at any time prior to the entry of judgment. See First Nat'l Bank of Lake Park v. Gay, 694 So.2d 784 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997)
.
Here, Dozer sought the same relief under two mutually exclusive remedies. The trial...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Chavarria v. Fleetwood Retail Corp.
...quotation marks and citation omitted). The doctrine exists to prevent double recovery for a single wrong. See Liddle v. A.F. Dozer, Inc., 777 So.2d 421, 422 (Fla.Dist.Ct. App.2000). Thus, when one remedy depends on affirming a contract and another on repudiating the contract, the remedies a......
-
Holmes Reg'l Med. Ctr., Inc. v. Allstate Ins. Co.
...unsatisfied. The election of remedies doctrine is intended "to prevent double recoveries for a single wrong." Liddle v. A.F. Dozer, Inc., 777 So.2d 421, 422 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000) (quoting Goldstein v. Serio, 566 So.2d 1338, 1339 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990) ). It applies in two circumstances, neither ......
-
Carran v. Morgan, 06-80608-CIV
...technical rule of procedure" which may be used by courts to prevent "double recoveries for a single wrong." Liddle v. A.F. Dozer, Inc., 777 So.2d 421, 422 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App. 2000). In analyzing this doctrine, the Liddle Court stated in Application of the doctrine can serve as an instrument o......
-
Heller v. Held, 4D01-435.
...different and distinct rights or redress different wrongs, the doctrine of election has no application." Liddle v. A.F. Dozer, Inc., 777 So.2d 421, 422 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000)(quoting Goldstein v. Serio, 566 So.2d 1338, 1339 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990)) (citations omitted), review denied, 797 So.2d 586......
-
"For want of a nail": applying Florida's reasonable certainty test to lost profit damage claims.
...equitable in nature. As explained recently in Ehrman v. Mann, 979 So. 2d 1011, 1012 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008) (quoting Liddle v. A.F. Dozier, 777 So. 2d 421, 422 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000)): "The purpose of the election of remedies doctrine is to 'prevent double recoveries for a single wrong.'" The reme......