[RPPTL LandTen] Unlawful Detainer issue

Tue Jan 31 09:20:13 PST 2012

We received the following inquiry regarding a residential eviction matter.   While our ListServe is not intended to provide a free legal forum for advice to the community at large, if you wish to offer a response to Mr. Haas on his question of the applicability of unlawful detainer to his scenario, I invite you to email Mr. Haas directly.

Neil

From: Lee Haas [mailto:lee at haas-castillo.com]
Sent: Friday, January 27, 2012 12:11 PM
To: Meyer, George J.
Cc: Adams, Darlene
Subject: Chapter 82 issues

Mr. Meyer,

I've practiced law in Clearwater for the past 28 years, handling business, construction, and real estate litigation, but only this last summer had my first unlawful detainer case, referred by a fellow attorney.  I now have another situation that appears tailor-made to resolution by filing an unlawful entry and detainer case, except for the fact that it is residential property.  The legislature amended the statute in 1977 to eliminate residential cases from the scope of the statute, but it is not clear to me what the alternative is.  I am contacting you as chair of RPPTL on the suggestion of a judge who formerly served in the legislature in the hope that you may have some insight into the statute or a means of suggesting an amendment to the statute that would actually get considered.

The facts of my latest case are that my client left town, leaving keys to a rental property with a friend (or so she thought).  When she returned, she found that this "friend" had signed a lease to the property as landlord with a convicted felon for two years with 0 rent except cleaning out the place.  The felon proceeded to throw all my client's stuff out of her house, and has probably kept, sold, or pawned her valuables.  Unlawful entry and detainer proceedings would be the quickest way for my client to regain possession - but it is inapplicable to residential matters.  The person doesn't qualify as a tenant as defined in 83.43(4), because he isn't entitled to occupy under a rental agreement, so I question whether part II of Chapter 83 provides the appropriate remedy.  He's arguably a trespasser, but chapter 66 doesn't apply because he's not claiming ownership.

I have to believe with the recent surge in foreclosures and empty properties, as well as from some of the news stories, that this issue has come up before.  What have you heard on how lawyers have dealt with these types of situations?  Has anyone else suggested that maybe chapter 82 needs to be tweaked to permit its use in certain types of residential matters?

Lee L. Haas, Esquire
Haas & Castillo, P.A.
Attorneys At Law
19321-C U.S. Hwy 19 N, Ste. 401
Clearwater, Florida 33764
(727) 535-4544 telephone
(727) 535-1855 facsimile
lee at haas-castillo.com<mailto:lee at haas-castillo.com>

[cid:image001.jpg at 01CCE012.AE222C10]

Neil B. Shoter
Partner / LEED Accredited Professional
________________________________
Shutts & Bowen LLP
1100 CityPlace Tower, 525 Okeechobee Boulevard | West Palm Beach, FL 33401
Direct: (561) 650-8535 | Fax: (561) 822-5525
E-Mail<mailto:NShoter at shutts.com> | Biography<http://www.shutts.com/attorneys-Neil-Shoter.html> | V-Card<http://www.shutts.com/vcard-181.vcf> | Website<http://www.shutts.com>

</pre>IRS CIRCULAR 230 NOTICE:   Pursuant to recently enacted<br>U.S. Treasury Department Regulations, we are now required<br>to advise you that, unless otherwise expressly indicated,<br>any federal tax advice expressed above was neither<br>written nor intended by the sender or this firm to be<br>used and cannot be used by any taxpayer for the purpose <br>of avoiding penalties that may be imposed under U.S. tax <br>law.  If any person uses or refers to any such tax advice<br>in promoting, marketing or recommending a partnership or<br>other entity, investment plan or arrangement to any <br>taxpayer, then the advice should be considered to have<br>been written to support the promotion or marketing by a <br>person other than the sender or this firm of that <br>transaction or matter, and such taxpayer should seek<br>advice based on the taxpayer's particular circumstances<br>from an independent tax advisor.<br><br><br>The information in this email transmission is privileged<br>and confidential.  If you are not the intended recipient,<br>nor the employee or agent responsible for delivering it to<br>the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any<br>dissemination or copying of this transmission (including<br>any attachments) is strictly prohibited.  If you have<br>received this email in error, please notify the sender by<br>email reply.  Thank you.<br><pre>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/private/landten/attachments/20120131/ab228da6/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 31534 bytes
Desc: image001.jpg
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/private/landten/attachments/20120131/ab228da6/attachment-0001.jpg>