Miami Business & Commercial Law Blog

It appears that Florida strategists who advised investors that good times were just around the corner may have been correct. The massive numbers of foreclosures that occurred during the recession are mostly resolved, and the latest news from the Florida banking industry is that commercial real estate lending is heating up. After many years of little to no lending opportunities, banks are cautiously putting out ‘open for business’ signs. 

For instance, Wells Fargo is looking closely at borrowers who want to develop properties pertaining to the industrial market, retail, multifamily rental properties, and some condominiums.  In an effort to avoid some of the mistakes made during the recession, Wells Fargo is carefully vetting borrowers and looking to lend only to those with experience. That being said, the bank is optimistic that South Florida has left the downturn behind and is in now trending toward growth.

Over the past several years of the recession, Florida's economy could be described as dismal. Jobs were scarce, banks did not want to lend money, and businesses were not inclined to take risks on leasing new office space. Few companies were expanding and instead were staying put or even downsizing. For these reasons, some experts advised against investing in Florida commercial real estate.

In an encouraging sign of an improving economy, the office real estate market has picked up dramatically. Recently, three large tenants have signed new leases for over 10,000 square feet respectively, in Miami and South Florida. One, a bank, will be enjoying around 62,000 square feet of new office space spread over three floors, plus a 2,000 square foot area in the building's lobby. Other business, such as a Latin American jewelry company and several attorney offices, are looking to begin contract negotiations to lease large amounts of space. Experts recommend that any company needing to lease over 5,000 square feet in Miami begin its search at least a year prior to the prospective move-in date.

Summer is approaching, and with it comes some of America's favorite activities, such as heading to the local ballpark to eat hot dogs and cheer on the home team. When baseball aficionados enter a new ballpark, they generally admire the stadium on their way to finding their seats in the crowd. Most people do not think twice about the laborers who built the stadium from the ground up. However, the workers who built Florida's new Marlins stadium are not happy about the fact that they had to file construction litigation to recover sums they say were not properly paid.

Some of the construction workers involved in the dispute argue that despite working specialized jobs, they were paid smaller sums because they were classified only as general laborers. Others claim that they worked for hours that were never paid. Certain workers say that they were fired after they brought the shortcomings to the attention of county officials, and others assert they were not compensated for overtime hours. In an effort to recover outstanding sums, construction crews have filed claims against the subcontractor and contractor on the Marlins stadium project.

The internet has become an integral part of business in modern day commerce. For most companies, it is convenient to sell parts and components to purchasers worldwide. But the convenience of on-line selling can come with a downside. In the past, vendors could cultivate a relationship with business owners by setting up meetings or sending out salespeople. Today, however, individuals who make purchases over the internet may have little personal connection to the seller. Consequently, purchasers may feel less duty to pay to their vendors on time when payment is not required up front. In such a case, an old-fashioned breach of contract claim may be the only solution for vendors who have not been paid.

A recent business contract dispute provides an example of an internet business being sued for its failure to pay a vendor. Specifically, an online business based in Florida, known as Infinite Labs, LLC purchased nutritional items and ingredients from a vendor, known as Phytogenx Inc. In the lawsuit, Phytogenx alleges that it delivered the products over a period of seven months, but Infinite Labs has failed to pay invoices totaling $369,631.