CAM Bradford Homes, LLC v. Wayne Arrants and Berkely Arrants

Summary

The Florida Fifth District Court of Appeal affirmed a final judgment holding that CAM Bradford Homes, LLC could not enforce its construction contract because it was never qualified as a business organization contractor by the Florida Department of Business and Professional Regulation. The court concluded that the company’s owner, although individually licensed and performing qualifying-agent duties, did not become the company’s qualifying agent without applying on the company’s behalf and receiving the required certification or registration.

Holdings

1. A business organization contractor is not licensed merely because an individually licensed owner performs the duties of a qualifying agent. The individual must apply to qualify the business organization and the Department must issue the required certificate or registration.
2. An unlicensed contractor may not enforce its contract in law or equity.
3. When a contract is rendered unenforceable under section 489.128, no lien or bond claim exists in favor of the unlicensed contractor for labor, services, or materials provided under the contract.
4. Summary judgment was proper because the material facts were undisputed and the Arrantses were entitled to judgment as a matter of law.
5. The argument that tortious interference did not require an enforceable contract was unpreserved and waived.

Questions Presented

1. Whether a limited liability company may qualify as a licensed business organization contractor when its owner is individually licensed and performs the duties of a qualifying agent but never applies to qualify the business organization with the Department of Business and Professional Regulation.
2. Whether an unlicensed contractor may enforce the construction contract or assert a lien or bond claim under sections 489.128(1) and (2), Florida Statutes (2020).
3. Whether the trial court properly granted summary judgment where the material facts concerning the owner's failure to apply as the business organization's qualifying agent were undisputed.
4. Whether the trial court erred in granting summary judgment on the tortious-interference claim; the appellate court held that issue was unpreserved and waived.

Disposition

affirmed