On January 7, 2026, Friedman Legal secured a victory for its client when the Fourth District Court of Appeal of the State of Florida issued a written opinion in its favor and found that there was no binding arbitration agreement between a subcontractor and a surety on a lien transfer bond.
The case arose from a dispute involving plumbing work performed on a project in Fort Lauderdale. After a period of nonpayment, Friedman Legal’s client recorded a construction lien. A surety later issued a lien transfer bond, and Friedman Legal filed suit to foreclose on the lien. In response, the surety sought to compel arbitration based on provisions in the construction subcontract. The trial court granted the request, and Friedman Legal appealed.
The appeal was spearheaded by Friedman Legal’s Nicole Moss, who argued that the arbitration provision—by its terms—could only be invoked at the election of the contractor, not the surety and that it did not apply to and was not incorporated into the lien transfer bond. On January 7, 2026, the Fourth District Court of Appeal agreed, holding that the trial court erred in compelling arbitration. In its opinion, the Court emphasized that a surety on a lien transfer bond cannot exercise contractual rights reserved to another party.
With the appellate court’s ruling, the matter will proceed in the trial court in Broward County.
“While arbitration can be an effective tool in certain cases, it was clear that the clause at issue did not apply to the surety in this context,” said Nicole Moss. “We are pleased with the Court’s decision and what it means for our client, and other similarly-situated lien transfer bond principals, moving forward.”
This decision reflects Friedman Legal’s experience in handling complex construction and appellate matters and its ability to effectively advocate for clients at every stage of litigation.
You can read the Court’s issued opinion here.
