CopyCited 15 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida
...e shall not be used to circumvent the intent and purposes of any provision of Section 83.69. Insofar as F.S. Section 83.69, F.S.A. is directly contrary or repugnant to other laws relating to landlords and tenants (particularly F.S. Section
83.41 and Section
83.62, F.S.A.) either enacted earlier in time or enacted in pari materia, it takes precedence thereover....
CopyCited 1 times | Published | Florida 3rd District Court of Appeal
...nded complaint to be true, and
construing all reasonable inferences from those allegations in favor of the
Prior Owners. United Auto. Ins. Co. v. Law Offices of Michael I. Libman,
46 So. 3d 1101, 1103-04 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010).
I. Section
83.62, Florida Statutes, Is Inapplicable
The trial court order states that the Prior Owners were alleging that
“the put-out on July 15, 2015 is governed by Florida Statutes §
83.62.” That
statute is a part of the Florida Residential Landlord and Tenant Act, and the
Act applies to “the rental of a dwelling unit.”4 Section
83.62 is not
applicable to a writ of possession to dispossess a former owner remaining in
possession after a foreclosure sale with no rental agreement in effect.
But the trial court’s order was incorrect in its implications that...
...the Prior Owners’ claims relied on that statute, and that the statute itself
offered Banon5 and Elmaleh “an immunity from liability for any loss,
destruction or damage to the personal property after its removal from the
premises.” The amended complaint mentioned section
83.62 in a footnote to
one paragraph of the general allegations and in one paragraph within the
conversion count. There is no separate claim grounded on a violation of
4 §
83.41, Fla. Stat. (2015).
5
section
83.62, nor are the causes of action alleged in the amended complaint
irrevocably tethered to a breach of that statute.
Section
83.62(2) applies to a writ of possession executed by the
sheriff regarding a residential apartment....
CopyPublished | Florida 5th District Court of Appeal | 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 16567
...ective sworn affidavits. We find
there were disputed issues of material fact regarding removal of Appellant’s property from
the house. Additionally, as part of its rationale for granting summary judgment, the trial
court erroneously relied upon section 83.62, Florida Statutes (2015)....
...3d DCA 1999)).
Sequential Foreclosures
In February 2014, Appellant was the successful bidder at a foreclosure auction for
the subject real property (“the house”) and a certificate of title was issued to her. Appellant
2
Because section 83.62 immunity cannot shield Appellee here, it was error for the trial
court to use that as a basis for granting final summary judgment.
Appellee’s third summary judgment argument, that Appellant’s personal property
was properly removed from the house and placed at or near the property line refers to
language in section 83.62....
...Appellant timely
appealed the final summary judgment.1
Summary Judgment
When moving for summary judgment, Appellee first argued in its motion and stated
in the affidavit of Mr. Hemlock, its manager, that it properly obtained the writ of possession
pursuant to section 83.62, which is titled and concerns, “Restoration of possession to
landlord.” The trial court considered that argument and relied upon section 83.62 as one
basis for granting summary judgment in favor of Appellee. The parties agree that there
was no landlord-tenant relationship between them. Thus, the trial court erred when it
concluded, as Appellee requested, that the section 83.62 writ of possession was properly
issued in favor of Appellee, permitting Appellant’s eviction and the removal of her
personal property.
The trial court also adopted Appellee’s second argument as a basis for granting
summary judgment, namely that section 83.62 immunized Appellee from any suit for
replevin or damages concerning personal property removed from the house....
...However,
those specific issues are not properly before the court in this appeal. Additionally, even
though Appellant challenged the court's issuance of the writ on the aforementioned
grounds, she did not appeal the order denying her motion to quash the writ.
4
Because section 83.62 immunity cannot shield Appellee here, it was error for the trial
court to use that as a basis for granting final summary judgment.
Appellee’s third summary judgment argument, that Appellant’s personal property
was properly removed from the house and placed at or near the property line refers to
language in section 83.62....
CopyPublished | Florida 3rd District Court of Appeal
...d.
Mr. Ice’s allegations go well beyond the facts of McCready, including acts
of intervention, control, and refusal to permit recovery of the property, by the
Association and its agents.
Finally, the Association’s reliance on section 83.62(2), Florida Statutes
(2012), is also unavailing....
...t.”3 According to the
Complaint, Mr. Ice was an owner of his unit, not a tenant, until his loss of title to
3 §§
83.40,
83.41, Fla. Stat. (2012).
7
the foreclosing mortgage lender. Second, section
83.62(2) exculpates the sheriff,
landlord, and landlord’s agent from liability “for the loss, destruction, or damage to
the property after it has been removed.” The evicted tenant’s property is to be
removed “to or near the prope...
