Legal Opinion

Clement, Et Ux. v. Pensacola Builders Supply Co.

Supreme Court of Florida

Decided June 16, 1939PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtThomas, J.

In the order of the chancellor from which' this appeal is taken he found that the bill of complaint “as Amended by the bill of particulars” showed a- waiver by. defendants of the provisions of a contract requiring a final certificate of an .architect as a condition precedent to the institution of the suit to foreclose a contractor’s lien, and consequently denied the motion to dismiss the bill.

From the pleadings which the chancellor mentioned’in his order the following allegations and statements appear: Appellants employed appellee to construct a dwelling house' and to furnish all material and…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Edward Edinger Co. v. WillisAppellate Court of Illinois · 1931

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Electric MacHinery Enterprises, Inc. v. Hunt Construction Group, Inc. (In Re Electric MacHinery Enterprises, Inc.)United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida · 2009
  2. Poranski v. MillingsSupreme Court of Florida · 1955
  3. Windowmaster Corporation v. Jefferson Const. Co.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1959
  4. Howdeshell, Inc. v. Kline Corp. (In Re Howdeshell, Inc.)United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida · 1985

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API