a material supplier of its responsibility for complying with statutory notice requirements. Mursten Constr., 588 So.2d at 1061. There, the notice of bond was not filed until after the supplier sued the owner to foreclose on a mechanic’s lien. Id. at 1062. The supplier amended its complaint to add a claim against the surety and general contractor to recover under the bond. Id. However, the supplier failed to serve written notice of nonpayment on the contractor. Id. The Third District, citing its obligation “to give the mechanic’s lien statute a strict, and therefore literal, reading,” held that the supplier’s failure to serve written notice constituted a failure to comply with the statutory condition precedent to recovery on the bond. Id. at 1062-63; see also Rinker, 849 So.2d at 1195 (<HOLDING>). The holdings in Bridgeport and Mursten
holding notice of balance due satisfies notice and demand requirements holding that when an insurer denies coverage on grounds unrelated to late notice a strong presumption arises that the insurer has not suffered prejudice from the late notice holding that late notice of the bond did not excuse supplier from its obligation to comply with statutory notice requirements holding notice provision in rcra and clean water act are virtually identical and citizens notice to violators under either act must strictly comply with statutory notice requirements holding that failure to comply with formal notice requirements prior to the termination of a contract comes too late to perfect an assignment on behalf of the assignee