Cases from cite.case.law:

CDC BUILDERS, INC. v. RIVIERA ALMERIA, LLC,, 51 So. 3d 510 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2010)

. . . Section 713.37 expressly states that Part I, chapter 713 “shall not be subject to a rule of liberal construction . . .

J. TRYTEK, v. GALE INDUSTRIES, INC., 3 So. 3d 1194 (Fla. 2009)

. . . Further, in 1977, the Legislature enacted section 713.37, which states that “[the Construction Lien Law . . . Before section 713.37 was enacted, our case law emphasized the Construction Lien Law’s purpose of protecting . . .

ACTION LABOR OF FLORIDA, INC. v. LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE CO., 879 So. 2d 1240 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2004)

. . . See also, § 713.37, Fla. . . .

PIERSON D. CONSTRUCTION, INC. a v. YUDELL, 863 So. 2d 413 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2003)

. . . The Construction Lien Law, sections 713.001-713.37, Florida Statutes (2000), applies to this case. . . .

I. ZALAY A. v. ACE CABINETS OF CLEARWATER, INC. USA, 700 So. 2d 15 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1997)

. . . See eh. 77-353, § 15, at 1533, Laws of Fla; § 713.37, Fla. . . .

DUVAL ASPHALT PRODUCTS, INC. v. E. VAUGHN RIVERS, INC. a a, 620 So. 2d 1043 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)

. . . The current concept of “lienors” in the mechanics’ lien law, sections 713.01-713.37, Florida Statutes . . .

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

. . . . § 713.37, Fla. Stat. (1989). . . .

NEW IMAGE CARPETS, INC. a JAMES, v. SANDERY CONSTRUCTION, INC. L. O., 541 So. 2d 1235 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1989)

. . . . § 713.37, Fla.Stat. (1987) (“This part shall not be subject to a rule of liberal construction....”) . . .

WALTER E. HELLER COMPANY SOUTHEAST, INC. v. PALMER- SMITH, 504 So. 2d 511 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1987)

. . . Section 713.37 provides that “[t]his part shall not be subject to a rule of liberal construction in favor . . .

GOLD v. M G SERVICES, INC., 491 So. 2d 1297 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1986)

. . . Furthermore, M & G specifically sought relief under the mechanic’s lien statute, §§ 713.01-713.37, Fla . . .

INLAND MATERIALS, INC. a v. SUPERIOR AIRCRAFT HANGARS, INC. a, 464 So. 2d 1320 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1985)

. . . See generally §§ 713.01-713.37, Fla.Stat. . . .

SPRINKLER FITTERS AND APPRENTICES LOCAL UNION NO. U. A. a Jr. V. O. H. U. A. v. F. I. T. R. SERVICE CORPORATION, f k a H. a a, 461 So. 2d 144 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1984)

. . . See Section 713.37, Florida Statutes (1983), which reads as follows: “Rule of construction — This part . . . See § 713.37, Fla.Stat. (1981) (“This part [the Mechanics’ Lien Law] shall not be subject to a rule of . . .

BRACCO, v. CARDOZO G., 434 So. 2d 1024 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1983)

. . . Balboa Insurance Co., 408 So.2d 1044, 1046, n. 4 (Fla.1981), that the legislature, by enacting section 713.37 . . . under part I, except those specified in this subsection as they are defined in this section. .Section 713.37 . . . ambiguously provides in full: 713.37 Rule of Construction. — This part shall not be subject to a rule . . .

T. GOLDBERGER, v. HOFCO, INC. a, 422 So. 2d 898 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1982)

. . . This appeal concerns the interaction of the Florida Mechanics’ Lien Law, Sections 713.01 to 713.37, and . . .

M. SALEH, v. WATKINS, d b a, 415 So. 2d 858 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1982)

. . . Section 713.37, Florida Statutes (1981); Falovitch v. . . .

JULIAN E. JOHNSON SONS, INC. v. BALBOA INSURANCE CO., 408 So. 2d 1044 (Fla. 1982)

. . . The legislature abrogated that rule by enacting § 713.37, Fla.Stat. (1979). . . .

HENRY SCHAEFER, 4 B.T.A. 816 (B.T.A. 1926)

. . . This is an appeal from the determination of a deficiency of $713.37 for the calendar year 1922. . . . the income as shown by his return by the amount reported by his wife, and computed the deficiency of $713.37 . . .