Case ID: so2d_567/html/0450-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PATTERSON, Judge.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Harold SAMHAT and Reliance Insurance Company, Appellants, v. COCOA MASONRY OF PINELLAS COUNTY, INC., and Harcar Aluminum Products Company, Appellees. Harold SAMHAT and Reliance Insurance Company, Appellants, v. DELTA AIR CONDITIONING & SHEET METAL, INC., Appellee. Harold SAMHAT, Appellant, v. COCOA MASONRY OF PINELLAS COUNTY, INC., Appellee. Harold SAMHAT and Reliance Insurance Company, Appellants, v. FLORIDA FOREST PRODUCTS, INC., Appellee. Harold SAMHAT, Appellant, v. FLORIDA FOREST PRODUCTS, INC., Appellee.
    Nos. 89-00384, 89-00842, 89-01558, 89-01944 and 89-03331.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    Aug. 29, 1990.
    Rehearing Denied Oct. 5, 1990.
    Nancy G. Farage of Freedman & Farage, P.A., Tampa, for appellants.
    Seymour A. Gordon of Gay and Gordon Attorneys, P.A., St. Petersburg, and Robert H. Willis, Jr. of Skelton, Willis & Bennett, St. Petersburg, for appellee Cocoa Masonry of Pinellas County, Inc.
    Stephen O. Cole and Margot Pequignot of McMullen, Everett, Logan, Marquardt & Cline, P.A., Clearwater, for appellee Florida Forest Products, Inc.
    Nick J. Sinardi, Tampa, for appellee Delta Air Conditioning & Sheet Metal, Inc.
    Robert K. Eddy of Eddy & Gregg, P.A., Tampa, for appellee Harcar Aluminum Products Co.
   PATTERSON, Judge.

Harold Samhat, the real property owner, and Reliance Insurance Company, the surety, appeal from final judgments entered in favor of subcontractors Cocoa Masonry of Pinellas County, Inc., Delta Air-Conditioning and Sheet Metal, Inc., Florida Forest Products, Inc., and Harcar Aluminum Products Company in this consolidated action arising from the construction of condominium units on Samhat’s property. We have considered all the points that the appellants have raised, and we affirm the judgments against the appellants in all respects except one.

In Cocoa Masonry’s action against Samhat and Reliance Insurance Company, it filed a four-count amended complaint. The form of the final judgment reflects that the trial court granted relief to Cocoa Masonry on count I, its claim for a mechanic’s lien foreclosure. Although Samhat transferred the lien to a bond, the final judgment in favor of Cocoa Masonry was entered against Samhat personally as well as against the surety. An individual has no personal liability if his only link to a mechanic’s lien action is his ownership of the property. Further, the transfer bond releases the property from the lien. See International Community Corporation-Tampa v. Davis Water and Waste Industries, Inc., 455 So.2d 1164, 1165 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984) (bond released property owner from liability). Thus, the judgment in favor of Cocoa Masonry must be vacated as to Samhat.

Affirmed in part, reversed in part.

DANAHY, A.C.J., and ALTENBERND, J., concur.