Puder v. Raymond Intern. Builders, Inc.

Citation424 So.2d 78
Decision Date14 December 1982
Docket NumberNos. 80-2128,80-2129,s. 80-2128
PartiesSamuel M. PUDER, Appellant, v. RAYMOND INTERNATIONAL BUILDERS, INC., Appellee.
CourtFlorida District Court of Appeals

Peters, Pickle, Flynn, Niemoeller, Stieglitz & Downs, Jeanne Heyward, Miami, for appellant.

Magill, Reid, Kuvin & Lewis and R. Fred Lewis, Miami, for appellee.

Before HENDRY, DANIEL S. PEARSON and JORGENSON, JJ.

HENDRY, Judge.

Appellant Samuel Puder, plaintiff/counter-defendant/third party plaintiff below, appeals from orders awarding attorney's fees and costs to Raymond International (Raymond). We affirm.

The instant appeal arises out of a suit filed by Puder to recover payment for architectural services rendered in connection with construction of the Flagler Center Building. The building owner counterclaimed for breach of contract and negligence for design and construction defects and Puder filed a second amended third party complaint seeking indemnity and contribution from Raymond, a subcontractor on the project. Raymond's motions for summary judgment were denied, and the cause proceeded to trial. Following presentation of all the evidence, Puder voluntarily dismissed his third party action against Raymond. The court below then granted Raymond's motions for costs, and attorney's fees pursuant to section 57.105, Florida Statutes (1979). Appeals from the orders were consolidated by this court. 1

Our review of the record leads us to agree with the trial court's finding that there was a complete absence of a justiciable issue of law or fact raised with regard to Puder's claims against Raymond, thus entitling Raymond to attorney's fees under section 57.105. The basis for our holding is that (1) Puder had no valid claim for contribution from Raymond since Raymond had previously settled its obligations via a mechanics' lien action and there was no evidence of bad faith in connection with the settlement, Metropolitan Dade County Transit Authority v. Simmons, 375 So.2d 858 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979), cert. denied, 386 So.2d 639 (Fla.1980); Seaboard Coast Line Railroad Co. v. Gordon, 328 So.2d 206 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976); (2) the legal relationship between Puder and Raymond would not support an indemnity claim and, in addition, there was no evidence that Raymond, the potential indemnitor, was negligent, Houdaille Industries, Inc. v. Edwards, 374 So.2d 490 (Fla.1979); General Portland Land Development Co. v. Stevens, 395 So.2d 1296 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981); Walter Taft Bradshaw & Associates v. Bedsole, 374 So.2d 644 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979); see generally Krestow v. Wooster, 360 So.2d 32 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978); (3) Puder ultimately dismissed all claims against Raymond after failing to present any evidence of Raymond's negligence or bad faith in connection with the settlement, see MacBain v. Bowling, 374 So.2d 75 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979); (4) the attempt to create a controversy was frivolous as Raymond was brought into the lawsuit solely for tactical purposes, see Whitten v. Progressive...

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 cases
  • Visoly v. Security Pacific Credit Corp., 3D99-1155.
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • August 16, 2000
    ...So.2d 435 (Fla.1990); Wood v. Price, 546 So.2d 88 (Fla. 2d DCA), review denied, 553 So.2d 1166 (Fla.1989); Puder v. Raymond Int'l Builders, Inc., 424 So.2d 78 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982), review denied, 434 So.2d 888 (Fla.1983). Under Section 57.105, Florida Statutes (1999), the losing party and the......
  • Tiedeman v. City of Miami
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • August 23, 1988
    ...So.2d 501 (Fla.1982); New England Rare Coin Galleries, Inc. v. Robertson, 506 So.2d 1161 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987); Puder v. Raymond Int'l Builders, Inc., 424 So.2d 78 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982), rev. denied, 434 So.2d 888 (Fla.1983); (b) attorney's fees were properly awardable under the above statute for......
  • Puder v. Revitz, s. 81-145
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • December 14, 1982
    ...to disturb the trial court's orders and affirm the judgments below in their entirety. Affirmed. 1 See Puder v. Raymond International Builders, Inc., 424 So.2d 78 (Fla.3d DCA 1982) for additional background on this case.2 Puder did not appeal the final judgment entered in Nutting's favor on ......
  • O'Brien v. Brickell Townhouse, Inc.
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • October 16, 1984
    ...of the order here under review. See Debra, Inc. v. Orange County, 445 So.2d 404, 405 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984); Puder v. Raymond International Builders, Inc., 424 So.2d 78 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); P.J. Constructors, Inc. v. Carter Electric Company, 410 So.2d 536 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982); New River Yachting......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT