← Case library
FL Supreme CourtJanuary 27, 2022Certified question answered in the affirmative; Second District decision approved🔬 Novel Issue

Hayslip v. U.S. Home Corp.

Case No. SC19-1371

The Florida Supreme Court answered a certified question of great public importance, holding that a mandatory arbitration covenant contained in a builder's special warranty deed is a real covenant that runs with the land and binds subsequent purchasers who were not parties to the deed. The Hayslips, who bought the home from the original purchasers, were compelled to arbitrate their section 553.84 building code claim against the builder because the deed covenant touched and involved the land, the parties intended it to run with the land, and the recorded deed gave constructive notice under section 695.11.

Key facts

  • The Hayslips purchased a home from original purchasers who had bought from the builder U.S. Home Corp., and the original deed contained a mandatory arbitration covenant for construction defect disputes.
  • The Hayslips filed a section 553.84 building code claim against the builder in court, but the builder sought to compel arbitration based on the arbitration covenant in the recorded deed.
  • +2 more key facts with a free trial

Why it matters

This is a major precedent for homebuilders and residential construction defect litigation: builders can insulate themselves from court litigation by embedding arbitration provisions in recorded deeds, binding all… — full analysis with a trial

🔒 Read the full opinion, holding & search the library

The full opinion PDF, the rules the court applied, our significance analysis, the background facts, and full-text search across every tracked Florida decision are available to members. Start a free 30-day trial — no credit card.

Not ready to sign up? Get the free Friday digest — the week's key Florida decisions by email, no login required.

Florida Court Tracker provides summaries of publicly available court opinions for informational and research purposes only. This is not legal advice and does not create an attorney–client relationship. Always verify holdings against the official opinion.