Title: Opinion File 74-47 thru 74-49
CITATION THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/WL00003384/00001
 Material Information
Title: Opinion File 74-47 thru 74-49
Physical Description: Book
Language: English
 Subjects
Spatial Coverage: North America -- United States of America -- Florida
 Notes
Abstract: Buddy Blain's Collections - Opinion File 74-47 thru 74-49
General Note: Box 14, Folder 4 ( Opinion File 1974 - 1975 - 1974-1975 ), Item 12
Funding: Digitized by the Legal Technology Institute in the Levin College of Law at the University of Florida.
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: WL00003384
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: Levin College of Law, University of Florida
Holding Location: Levin College of Law, University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.

Full Text

14-q7

?zrsi pii~r~lnC







MEMORANDUM


TO: Myron Gibbons

FROM: Rob Williams

RE: SWFWMD Contractor's Bonds

DATE: February 19, 1974



FACTS:


Contractors in Hillsborough County have bonds

which are designed to protect all persons suffering any

loss or damage occasioned by the contractor for failing

to comply with the provisions of the Hillsborough County

Code applicable to the work performed by the contractor.

Some of these contractors have built docks in the Hills-

borough River and other areas over which SWFWMD has juris-

divition.


QUESTIONS:


1. Can SWFWMD go against the bonding companies

under the provisions of the bond.

2. If not, what can the District do to require

builders who build docks within the District's jurisdiction

to put up a bond as the District does under the District's

Well Drilling Rules and Regulations.
















DISCUSSION:


1. A complete reading of the provisions of

the Hillsborough County bond reveals that a failure on

the part of the contractor in properly constructing a

structure gives only "the person for whom such work is

performed a right of action against the Principal and

Surety" under the bond obligation. Thus, it is clear

that the provisions of the bond would not directly

apply to SWFWMD. Moreover, a review of the doctrine

of third party beneficiary as applied to sureties leads

to the conclusion that this theory would not be available

to SWFWMD in order to sue on the bond.

2. The District has ample statutory authority

to promulgate appropriate regulations requiring the post-

ing of bonds, similar to its Well Drilling bonds, for

structures built in the District's Works. F.S. 378.151,

Rules and Regulations, enforcement, provides as follows:


In administering this chapter
the governing board of the
district is authorized to make
and adopt reasonable rules,
regulations and orders consistent
with law and such rules, regula-
tions and orders may be enforced
by mandatory injunction, or
other appropriate action in the
courts of the State.

F. S. 378.17; Use of works by other districts provides

in part:

(1) the governing board shall have
authority to prescribe the manner
in which local works provide .

















by private persons shall
connect with and make use
of the works of the district,
to issuerpermits therefore,
and to cancel the same for
noncompliance with the con-
ditions thereof, or for other
cause.


These provisions, pursuant to Ch. 378, apply to SWFWMD

and along with the provisions of Ch. 61-691 provide the

necessary authority for the District to require contractor's

bonds of the type contemplated.




University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs