Upland Development of Central Florida, Inc. v. Bridge

910 So. 2d 942 (2005)

From our private database of 45,900+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Upland Development of Central Florida, Inc. v. Bridge

Florida District Court of Appeal
910 So. 2d 942 (2005)

Facts

Upland Development of Central Florida, Inc. (Upland) (plaintiff), a general contractor, contracted with Amwell Corporation (Amwell), a subcontractor, to perform work on a construction project. Amwell’s president, Whittaker Bridge (defendant), signed and submitted partial-lien waivers to Upland representing that Amwell’s laborers and suppliers had been paid. Based on the lien waivers, Upland paid Amwell directly; however, Upland later learned that Amwell had not paid its laborers and suppliers. Upland sued Bridge for fraud. Bridge moved to strike Upland’s complaint as a sham pleading, arguing that it was barred by res-judicata because Upland had previously pursued an arbitration against Amwell to judgment over Amwell’s failure to provide the promised warranty for work performed. Upland’s fraud complaint did not mention the prior arbitration award. Upland challenged Bridge’s motion-to-strike, arguing that res-judicata was not implicated because the fraud complaint and the arbitration involved different defendants and different claims. The trial court granted Bridge’s motion-to-strike, holding that res-judicata applied because both the arbitration and the fraud complaint arose out of Amwell’s performance of the construction contract, and that Upland could not file separate, sequential lawsuits first against Amwell itself and then against Bridge, Amwell’s president. Upland appealed, arguing that (1) Bridge’s res-judicata affirmative defense could not form the basis for a motion-to-strike because it was not contained within the four corners of Upland’s fraud complaint; and (2) a ruling on Bridge’s motion-to-strike must be strictly limited to the truthfulness of Upland’s fraud complaint.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Thompson, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 733,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 733,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 45,900 briefs, keyed to 984 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 733,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 45,900 briefs - keyed to 984 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership