Cases from cite.case.law:

DAVIS WATER WASTE INDUSTRIES, INC. v. EMBRY DEVELOPMENT CORP. a, 603 So. 2d 1357 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992)

. . . this case involves construction of the phrase “abutting lands,” as the term is utilized in section 713.04 . . . In its complaint for mechanic’s lien filed pursuant to section 713.04, Davis alleged that the materials . . . The applicable statutory provision is as follows: 713.04 SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENTS (1) Any lienor who, . . . cost of the services and materials, if unpaid, may be the basis for a lien upon the abutting land, § 713.04 . . . Finding no error in the trial court’s construction of section 713.04, Florida Statutes (1989), we AFFIRM . . .

TRI- COUNTY CONCRETE PRODUCTS, INC. v. BOYNTON WEST CORPORATION, 566 So. 2d 335 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1990)

. . . held that the proper payments provision of Section 713.06, Florida Statutes (1985), applied to Section 713.04 . . .

MARKS LANDSCAPE PAVING CO. a v. R. P. B. INDUSTRIAL PARK, INC. a, 552 So. 2d 256 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1989)

. . . By statutory definition, the work performed by Marks fell under § 713.04, Fla.Stat. (1985), which provides . . . as the site of any improvement shall include .... the paving of streets, curbs and sidewalks.... § 713.04 . . . Section 713.04 is silent as to the applicability of the proper payments provisions of section 713.06, . . . that the legislature did not intend for that requirement to apply to § 713.04. . . . 1985), wherein the Second District held that the proper payments provision of § 713.06 applied to § 713.04 . . .

HODUSA CORPORATION, a v. ABRAY CONSTRUCTION COMPANY,, 546 So. 2d 1099 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1989)

. . . was not required to furnish the affidavit, because subdivision improvements are governed by section 713.04 . . . It is true that the contractor’s affidavit requirement is not found in section 713.04 but in section . . . interplay of the various sections of the mechanics’ lien statutes, our court has held that sections 713.04 . . . Judge Boardman wrote in Sewer Viewer, 454 So.2d at 702: ... we consider that the purpose of section 713.04 . . . lien for subdivisions in regard to the manner, amount, and extent of a lien perfected under section 713.04 . . .

THE FLORIDA BAR In ADVISORY OPINION- NONLAWYER PREPARATION OF NOTICE TO OWNER AND NOTICE TO CONTRACTOR, 544 So. 2d 1013 (Fla. 1989)

. . . 713.05), professional lienors (§ 713.03), and lienors who make the site suitable for improvement (§ 713.04 . . .

NINTENDO OF AMERICA INC. v. MAGNAVOX COMPANY, 707 F. Supp. 717 (S.D.N.Y. 1989)

. . . MPEP § 713.04. . . . discovering field of search); § 713.03 (interview for “sounding out” Examiner not permitted); and § 713.04 . . .

RITE- HITE CORPORATION, v. KELLEY COMPANY, INC., 819 F.2d 1120 (Fed. Cir. 1987)

. . . See also Manual of Patent Examining Procedure § 713.04 (4th ed. 1979). . . .

In CONTINENTAL COUNTRY CLUB, INC., 64 B.R. 177 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 1986)

. . . benefited all the lots in the mobile home park, its mechanic’s lien claim is governed by Florida Statute § 713.04 . . . Both §§ 713.04 and 713.05 grant one who performs services or furnishes materials the right to a lien . . . A lien based on Florida Statutes § 713.04 attaches and takes priority as of the date the claim of lien . . .

GULF HORIZONS DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, INC. v. LEWIS, d b a D L, 478 So. 2d 1180 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1985)

. . . Appellant relies upon section 713.04, Florida Statutes (1983) to excuse its failure to serve a notice . . . The trial court, in granting summary judgment for appel-lee Zephyr Egg, ruled that section 713.04 was . . . While the text of section 713.04 does not specifically refer to subdivision improvements, section 713.02 . . . makes it clear that section 713.04 is limited to liens for that kind of work. . . .

SOUTHERN CONTRACTOR RENTALS, INC. a v. BRODERICK, a, 476 So. 2d 1376 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1985)

. . . deciding this appeal, we are again called upon to consider the interrelation and interaction of sections 713.04 . . . to our decision here, and based partially on their authority and on the express language of section 713.04 . . . failed to make clear whether the “proper payment” requirements of 713.06 were applicable to 713.04. . . . It appears, as we held in those cases, that the primary intent of the legislature in enacting 713.04 . . . We cannot ignore the specific language of section 713.04, which unequi-vocably states that “[N]o lien . . .

WEN- DIC CONSTRUCTION CO. INC. a v. MAINLANDS CONSTRUCTION CO. INC. a, 463 So. 2d 1187 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1985)

. . . See § 713.04, Fla.Stat. . . .

AMERICAN DIVERSIFIED DREDGING, INC. v. NAUTILUS CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION,, 457 So. 2d 597 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1984)

. . . See § 713.04, Fla. Stat. (1983). . . .

INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY CORPORATION- TAMPA v. DAVIS WATER AND WASTE INDUSTRIES, INC., 455 So. 2d 1164 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1984)

. . . , when the construction project in question involved a subdivision development governed by sections 713.04 . . . Appellants essentially argued that subdivision liens under sections 713.04 and 713.07 are independent . . . Sections 713.04 and 713.07 provide for less restrictive notice requirements for subdivision liens and . . . There is no alternative method of distribution described in section 713.04, nor 713.07. . . . The rest of chapter 713, part I, except as excluded by sections 713.04 and 713.07, applies to subdivision . . .

SEWER VIEWER, INC. v. SHAWNEE SUNSET DEVELOPERS, INC. a d b a, 454 So. 2d 701 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1984)

. . . Appellant timely recorded its claim of lien against appellee’s property under section 713.04, Florida . . . In so concluding, we consider that the purpose of section 713.04 is simply to provide less restrictive . . . Buckles-Thompson, Inc., 383 So.2d 280 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980) (section 713.04 creates “subdivision exception . . . Harrell, 364 So.2d 802 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978) (reading section 713.04 in pari mate-ria with section 713.06 . . . Section 713.04 is obviously contained in part I of chapter 713. . . .

PEMBROKE VILLAS OF BROWARD, INC. a v. RAYMUNDO,, 447 So. 2d 324 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1984)

. . . Raymundo’s services fall within the category of lienors described in Section 713.04, Florida Statutes . . . We hold that because the Legislature chose not to specifically require an affidavit under Section 713.04 . . . At issue is the interpretation to be given Section 713.04, Florida Statutes (1981). . . . As I see it, the enactment of Section 713.04, Florida Statutes (1981) merely represents the Legislative . . . In my judgment the Legislature did not intend, by the enactment of Section 713.04, Florida Statutes ( . . . In summation, I suggest that Section 713.04, Florida Statutes (1981), does not create a new class of . . .

LITTON SYSTEMS, INC. v. WHIRLPOOL CORPORATION,, 728 F.2d 1423 (Fed. Cir. 1984)

. . . MPEP § 713.04 (3d ed. rev. 1970), reprinted in A. Deller, Walker on Patents, ch. . . . the applicant * * to make the substance of an interview of record in the application file, * * MPEP § 713.04 . . .

M. D. VICKERMAN, v. HENNEPIN COUNTY PROBATE COURT, WILSON, v. HENNEPIN COUNTY PROBATE COURT,, 543 F. Supp. 165 (D. Minn. 1982)

. . . Dayton and $713.04 for Mr. Messinger. III. DISCUSSION A. . . . Dayton’s expenses and $713.04 for Mr. Messinger’s expenses. . . .

G. L. ROYAL, Jr. F. d b a F. a v. CLEMONS, d b a, 394 So. 2d 155 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1981)

. . . required to file notice to owner because his work which involved hauling, etc., brought him under Section 713.04 . . . Section 713.04, by its very term, applies to subdivision improvements. . . .

G. W. MARTIN SEAWALL, INC. v. FLAGSHIP FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF MIAMI, CGC, 388 So. 2d 623 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1980)

. . . find reversible error if the trier of the fact found the Appellant/Lienor to be subject to Section 713.04 . . . Said Section 713.04 creates a lien for subdivision improvements but provides that no lien be acquired . . .

PFIZER, INC. v. INTERNATIONAL RECTIFIER CORPORATION,, 545 F. Supp. 486 (C.D. Cal. 1980)

. . . Patent Office, Manual of Patent Examining Procedures § 713.04 (3d ed. 1961), as amended (1970), reprinted . . . (This is the practice suggested for examiners by Section 713.04 of the Manual of Patent Examining Procedure . . .

C. MERSHON, Jr. v. BUCKLES- THOMPSON, INC. a, 383 So. 2d 280 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1980)

. . . Section 713.04, Fla.Stat. (1979). . . .

AMERICAN FIRE CASUALTY CO. v. DAVIS WATER WASTE INDUSTRIES, INC., 377 So. 2d 164 (Fla. 1979)

. . . the materials supplied were used for “subdivision improvements” as that term is defined in section 713.04 . . . , not in privity with the owner, who furnishes materials for subdivision improvements under section 713.04 . . . Section 713.04, dealing with subdivision improvements, establishes a class of liens separate from the . . . There is no requirement of serving notice on the owner under section 713.04. . . . : 713.04 Subdivision improvements. — Any lienor who, regardless of whether in privity, performs services . . .

BAUMGARTNER CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC. a I. W. v. C. L. HARRELL,, 364 So. 2d 802 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1978)

. . . with “M” Enterprises (“M”) to make their real property suitable for improvements as defined in Section 713.04 . . . Harrell contends that pursuant to Section 713.04, Florida Statutes (1975), and American Fire & Cas. . . . Section 713.04 which applies to subdivision improvement lienors does not require notice to owners. . . . However, only Section 713.04 applies here because its first sentence clearly states that it applies to . . . Section 713.07(1) states that liens under Section 713.04 shall attach at the time of recordation and . . .

AMERICAN FIRE AND CASUALTY COMPANY, v. DAVIS WATER WASTE INDUSTRIES, INC. d b a a J. Jr. E. J. d b a a J., 358 So. 2d 225 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1978)

. . . Thus, § 713.03 concerns itself with liens for professional services, § 713.04 applies to subdivision . . . Thus we see that: (1) § 713.03 specifically states that no notice is required. (2) § 713.04 is silent . . . Prom the above four line analysis, it should be easy to conclude that, because § 713.04 (the one we are . . . The first sentence of § 713.04 begins, “Any lienor who, regardless of whether in privity . . . furnishes . . . our opinion that by reason of this language, the lienor in the instant case falls squarely under § 713.04 . . .

In COORDINATED PRETRIAL PROCEEDINGS IN ANTIBIOTIC ANTITRUST ACTIONS. PFIZER, INC. v. INTERNATIONAL RECTIFIER CORP., 538 F.2d 180 (8th Cir. 1976)

. . . Patent Office, Manual of Patent Examining Procedure § 713.04 (3d ed. 1961), as amended (1970), reprinted . . .

BOOTH, v. JOE LOMBARDI, INC., 309 So. 2d 51 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1975)

. . . Appellant contends that under § 713.04 of the Mechanics’ Lien Law, in order to perfect his claim of lien . . .

W. S. McALEER, v. McNALLY PITTSBURG MFG. CORP., 307 F.2d 220 (3d Cir. 1962)

. . . counsel filed of record it appears that the maximum reeov-ery, exclusive of interest and costs is $9,-713.04 . . .

W. S. McALEER, v. McNALLY PITTSBURG MFG. CORP., 198 F. Supp. 606 (W.D. Pa. 1961)

. . . The three sums added together come to $9,-713.04 and this is the aggregate amount that plaintiff could . . .