Subscribe to our newsletter to receive more information and regular updates, click here to subscribe

Home New Cases No Contractual Privity, Dismiss the Complaint, Argues Prince Contracting

No Contractual Privity, Dismiss the Complaint, Argues Prince Contracting


October 4, 2021, Middle District of Florida – Third-Party Defendant Prince Contracting, LLC, recently moved to dismiss Defendant/Third-Party Plaintiff J&L Utility Construction, Inc.’s third-party complaint against Prince Contracting.

Prince Contracting was a prime contractor on a Florida Department of Transportation construction project. Prince allegedly sub-contracted certain work to a third-party defendant H&M Electrical and Underground Utilities, Inc. H&M purportedly subcontracted work to J&L, but failed to pay J&L, even though Prince had paid H&M for the services furnished by J&L. Prince Contracting brought a motion to dismiss the complaint brought against it by J&L, alleging that J&L lacks contractual privity with Prince and has no right to enforce the subcontract because the sub-subcontract did not bind Prince Contracting. Prince Contracting also argues that it has already paid H&M for the very damages that J&L seeks.

Earlier this year, on April 9, 2021, Plaintiff Soneet R. Kapila, as Chapter 7 Trustee for the substantively consolidated bankruptcy estate of Richert Funding, LLC, Dwight Donald Richert and, Holly Berry Richert instituted legal proceedings against J&L Utility Construction, Inc. for breach of a factoring agreement. Richert Funding was a funding business with a primary focus on factoring accounts receivables. Allegedly, Richert Funding made one or more transfers of interest of Richert Funding in property to J&L before the Debtor’s petition date. The Trustee seeks to avoid those transfers as preferences and fraudulent conveyance.


Jones & Associates

Course Registration Form

Enter your email and press subscribe

Enter your email and press subscribe