627.756
Bonds for construction contracts; attorney fees in case of suit.
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
FL-LEGleg.state.fl.us
JustiaFla. Statutes
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
627.756 Bonds for construction contracts; attorney fees in case of suit.—
(1) In a suit brought by an owner, a contractor, a subcontractor, a laborer, or a materialman against a surety insurer under payment or performance bonds written by the insurer under the laws of this state to indemnify against pecuniary loss by breach of a building or construction contract, upon the rendition of a judgment or decree by any of the courts of this state against the surety insurer and in favor of the owner, contractor, subcontractor, laborer, or materialman, the trial court or, in the event of an appeal in which the owner, contractor, subcontractor, laborer, or materialman prevails, the appellate court, shall adjudge or decree against the surety insurer and in favor of the owner, contractor, subcontractor, laborer, or materialman a reasonable sum as fees or compensation for the attorney prosecuting the suit in which the recovery is had.
(2) A surety who issues a bid, performance, or payment bond in connection with construction activities where hazardous substances exist or are discovered is liable under ss. 376.308 and 403.727 only to the extent provided in this subsection. In case of a default, the surety is liable only for the cost of completion of the contract work in accordance with the plans and specifications, less the balance of funds remaining to be paid under the contract, up to the penal sum of the bond. The surety is not liable on a bond to indemnify or compensate the obligee for loss or liability arising from personal injury or property damage, whether or not caused by a breach of the bonded contract. Further, a right of action does not accrue on a bond to or for the use of any person other than the obligee named in the bond.
History.—s. 616, ch. 59-205; s. 1, ch. 70-334; s. 3, ch. 76-168; s. 17, ch. 77-353; s. 1, ch. 77-457; ss. 2, 3, ch. 81-318; ss. 569, 573, 809(2nd), ch. 82-243; s. 79, ch. 82-386; ss. 87, 114, ch. 92-318; s. 2, ch. 2019-94; s. 12, ch. 2023-15.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 42
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1972–2024 · leading case: DADELAND DEPOT. v. St. Paul Fire and Marine
DADELAND DEPOT. v. St. Paul Fire and Marine (2006)
“See § 627.756, Fla. Stat. (1999). Section 627.”
Julian E. Johnson & Sons, Inc. v. Balboa Ins. Co. (1982)
“Johnson's complaint originally sought attorney's fees in accordance with the provisions of section 627.756, Florida Statutes (1977).”
L. ROSS v. RW Roberts Const. Co. (1985)
“[4] Likewise, a statute, such as section 627.756, Florida Statutes (1983), which extends the application of an existing statute which itself created substantive rights and obligations (such as section 627.”
Hegeman-Harris Co., Inc. v. All State Pipe Supply Co., Inc. (1981)
“However, I do not agree with the result because I believe the application of section 627.756, Florida Statutes (1979), to a mechanics' lienor's action on a payment bond is a violation of the lienor's right to equal protection of the law.”
Snead Const. Corp. v. Langerman (1978)
“13 of the Insurance Code states that the code's provisions regarding types of insurance, insurers or as to "a particular matter" prevail over all other such provisions.”
Bankers & Shippers Ins. v. Aia Insulation (1980)
“The final point in Bankers' appeal is that the amount of attorneys' fees award to AIA, Hamilton and Meekins is erroneous because Section 627.756(2), Florida Statutes (1977), limits attorneys' fees in a suit on a payment bond to a maximum of 12 1/2%.”
Kel Homes, LLC v. Burris (2006)
“428, Florida Statutes (1987), which allows for an award of attorney's fees upon rendition of a judgment against any insurer, and section 627.756, which applied section 627.”
Fewox v. McMerit Const. Co. (1989)
“Section 627.756 provides: Section 627.428 applies to suits brought by owners, subcontractors, laborers, and materialmen against a surety insurer under payment of performance bonds written by the insurer under the laws of this state to indemnify against pecuniary loss by breach…”
Allied General Contractors v. Superior Asphalt Co. (1981)
“The Fourth District now holds that section 627.756 prevails over section 713.”
DiStefano Const., Inc. v. Fidelity & Deposit Co. of Md. (1992)
“[4] See § 627.756, Fla. Stat. (1987). [5] See § 627.”
Willey v. MK Roark, Inc. (1993)
“1985), and section 713.29, Florida Statutes (1990).”
Danis Industries v. GROUND IMP. TECH. (1994)
“428(1), Fla. Stat. (1989). This language specifically applies to payment or performance bonds written by a surety insurer to indemnify against losses associated with construction projects, § 627.”
— 627.756(1) — 2 cases
DADELAND DEPOT. v. St. Paul Fire and Marine (2006)
“See § 627.756, Fla. Stat. (1999). Section 627.”
— 627.756(2) — 12 cases
Bankers & Shippers Ins. v. Aia Insulation (1980)
“The final point in Bankers' appeal is that the amount of attorneys' fees award to AIA, Hamilton and Meekins is erroneous because Section 627.756(2), Florida Statutes (1977), limits attorneys' fees in a suit on a payment bond to a maximum of 12 1/2%.”
Snead Const. Corp. v. Langerman (1978)
“13 of the Insurance Code states that the code's provisions regarding types of insurance, insurers or as to "a particular matter" prevail over all other such provisions.”
Julian E. Johnson & Sons, Inc. v. Balboa Ins. Co. (1982)
“Johnson's complaint originally sought attorney's fees in accordance with the provisions of section 627.756, Florida Statutes (1977).”
Hegeman-Harris Co., Inc. v. All State Pipe Supply Co., Inc. (1981)
“However, I do not agree with the result because I believe the application of section 627.756, Florida Statutes (1979), to a mechanics' lienor's action on a payment bond is a violation of the lienor's right to equal protection of the law.”
Allied General Contractors v. Superior Asphalt Co. (1981)
“The Fourth District now holds that section 627.756 prevails over section 713.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.