A recent ruling from the District Court of Appeal of Florida has clarified the outcome of a legal battle between homeowners Christopher and Joy Cates and Ken Sarbu Construction Company, Inc. The court’s decision, issued on September 10, 2026, addresses issues of contract breaches and prevailing party status in a case that has implications for future construction disputes.
The Cates, who hired Sarbu Construction to renovate their home, found themselves embroiled in a legal dispute over the quality and completion of the work. The court's ruling affects not only the parties involved but also sets a precedent for how similar cases may be handled in the future.
Background
Christopher and Joy Cates contracted Ken Sarbu Construction Company to remove and replace balconies on their luxury home located on Amelia Island, Florida. The initial agreement stated that the project would take approximately ten weeks. However, the work extended to six months, leading to a breakdown in the relationship between the Cates and the construction company.
As the project dragged on, the Cates expressed dissatisfaction with the progress and informed Sarbu Construction that no further work should be performed on their property. Despite this, Sarbu Construction claimed to have completed significant portions of the work, including a change order, and subsequently filed a lien for unpaid labor and materials.
In response, the Cates filed counterclaims against Sarbu Construction, alleging breach of contract, fraudulent lien, and negligence. They successfully argued that the lien was fraudulent, leading the trial court to discharge it. The case then proceeded to a bench trial to resolve the remaining claims.
The Ruling
The District Court of Appeal of Florida ruled on the appeal and cross-appeal from both parties. The court affirmed the trial court's award of $9,596.00 to Sarbu Construction for the change order work but reversed the trial court's designation of Sarbu Construction as the prevailing party.
The court ruled, "As we read the record, the trial court found that the Cates breached their obligations under the change order. We reverse, however, the finding that Sarbu Construction was the prevailing party in the litigation because the trial judge applied an incorrect test."
The judges involved in the ruling included Chief Judge Jay, Judge Eisnaugle, and Judge Makar. The court emphasized that the trial judge failed to apply the correct standard for determining the prevailing party, which should consider significant issues tried before the court.
Impact
This ruling has significant implications for both parties involved and for future contract disputes in Florida. By reversing the trial court's finding of Sarbu Construction as the prevailing party, the court highlighted the importance of applying the correct legal standards in determining who is entitled to attorney's fees.
The court's decision reinforces the idea that simply winning a monetary award does not automatically make a party the prevailing party in litigation. This ruling may encourage parties in similar disputes to carefully consider their claims and defenses, knowing that the outcome may hinge on the broader context of the case rather than just the final monetary award.
What's Next
The case has been remanded for further proceedings, where the trial court will need to reassess the prevailing party status based on the correct legal standard. It remains to be seen if either party will appeal this latest ruling or if there are related cases pending that could influence the outcome.