[RPPTL LandTen] Eviction Question

[Shane Weaver]

McCready is a 1981 decision and 83.62(2) was created in 1988. To the extent McCready is still usable, it probably only applies if a tenant tried filing suit after a landlord had complied with the statute. (Of course, one would not need case law in that situation because 83.62(2) already releases liability.)

I agree with Greg. As long as the landlord moves the property to or near the property line, they are not responsible for what happens to it afterward. However, I do not know if putting the property in a dumpster at or near the property line complies. I would argue that a dumpster or trash receptacle is not within the statute's intent and does not offer a tenant meaningful opportunity to recover their property before it is soiled or damaged. You'd literally have to climb in to get everything out of it.

Shane Weaver, Esq.
Legal Aid Society of Palm Beach County
423 Fern Street, Suite 200
West Palm Beach, FL 33401
Tel. (561) 822-9785
Fax (561) 822-9885

From: landten-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Alberto M Cardet
Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 3:00 PM
To: 'Cary Sabol'; 'RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee'
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] Eviction Question

See McCready v Booth 398 So.2d 1000

From: landten-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Cary Sabol
Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 1:53 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: [RPPTL LandTen] Eviction Question

Dear Group Members,

I have a case where my client (landlord) evicted a tenant and when the Sheriff execute the Writ, tenant had not moved any of the personal items.  Sheriff told landlord to "dispose" of the property, which landlord interpreted to mean throw in the trash.  Now, former tenant is suing landlord for the lost value of tenant's property.

Does anyone know of any case law or legal authority that clearly defines what landlord can and cannot do with tenant's property after eviction?  Since the leased premises was a condo, landlord could not simply leave it all at the property line because that would have been a violation of condo rules.

Any ideas are appreciated.
Cary
Cary P. Sabol, Esq.
P.O. Box 15981
West Palm Beach, Florida 33416
Phone: (561) 281-2744
Fax:     (561) 691-6049

Confidentiality Notice: This email transmission and any attachments are confidential and may be legally privileged.  If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the information contained herein is STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/private/landten/attachments/20110804/c94036bc/attachment.html