[RPPTL LandTen] Unlawful Detainer issue

Tue Jan 31 11:31:05 PST 2012

I have had the same experience in Miami-Dade as Carol and agree with her analysis. 

Alberto M. Cardet, P.A.

1330 Coral Way #301

Miami FL 33145

305-403-7783

305-403-7824 (fax)

From: landten-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Cary Sabol
Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2012 2:10 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] Unlawful Detainer issue

Neil,

I recently handled two Unlawful Entry & Detainer cases in Palm Beach County and proceeded under Chapter 82 and both cases went very smoothly and we were able to have the trespassers removed in a relatively timely manner.  Sec. 82.03 specifically states these matters are entitled to summary procedure under Sec. 51.011.

Regarding his concern that this statute does not apply to residential properties, I would respectfully disagree.  Although Sec. 82.02(2) states: "This section shall not apply with regard to residential tenancies," my argument is that this is not a "tenancy."  It doesn't say the statute doesn't apply to "residential properties" it specifically says "tenancies" which I read to mean that you have to use Ch. 83 if a "tenancy" has been created.  In my humble opinion, illegally obtaining possession and occupancy of a property (residential or commercial) does not create a "tenancy."  Sec. 83.43(4) defines a "tenant" as "any persona entitled to occupy a dwelling unit under a rental agreement."  Since there is no rental agreement, the occupant cannot be a "tenant" and therefore, the situation is not a residential "tenancy."

Based on the above roundabout analysis, I would (and did successfully) argue that Ch. 82 does apply to this situation. 

Cary 

Law Offices of Cary P. Sabol

P.O. Box 15981 | West Palm Beach | Florida | 33416 

Phone: (561) 281-2744 

  _____  

IRS Circular 230 Notice: Pursuant to recently enacted U.S. Treasury Department Regulations, we are now required to advise you that, unless otherwise expressly indicated, any federal tax advice expressed above was neither written nor intended by the sender or this firm to be used and cannot be used by any taxpayer for the purpose of avoiding penalties that may be imposed under U.S. tax law. If any person uses or refers to any such tax advice in promoting, marketing or recommending a partnership or other entity, investment plan or arrangement to any taxpayer, then the advice should be considered to have been written to support the promotion or marketing by a person other than the sender or this firm of that transaction or matter, and such taxpayer should seek advice based on the taxpayer's particular circumstances from an independent tax advisor. 

Confidentiality Notice: This electronic mail transmission is intended for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential information belonging to the sender which is protected by the attorney-client privilege. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately by e-mail and delete the original message. Thank you for your cooperation.

  _____  

From: Neil B. Shoter <NShoter at shutts.com>
To: 'RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee' <landten at lists.flabarrpptl.org> 
Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2012 12:20 PM
Subject: [RPPTL LandTen] Unlawful Detainer issue

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

http://www.shutts.com/shutts100.jpg

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
 <mailto:NShoter at shutts.com> E-Mail |  <http://www.shutts.com/attorneys-Neil-Shoter.html> Biography |  <http://www.shutts.com/vcard-181.vcf> V-Card |  <http://www.shutts.com> Website

IRS CIRCULAR 230 NOTICE: Pursuant to recently enacted
U.S. Treasury Department Regulations, we are now required
to advise you that, unless otherwise expressly indicated,
any federal tax advice expressed above was neither
written nor intended by the sender or this firm to be
used and cannot be used by any taxpayer for the purpose 
of avoiding penalties that may be imposed under U.S. tax 
law. If any person uses or refers to any such tax advice
in promoting, marketing or recommending a partnership or
other entity, investment plan or arrangement to any 
taxpayer, then the advice should be considered to have
been written to support the promotion or marketing by a 
person other than the sender or this firm of that 
transaction or matter, and such taxpayer should seek
advice based on the taxpayer's particular circumstances
from an independent tax advisor.

The information in this email transmission is privileged
and confidential. If you are not the intended recipient,
nor the employee or agent responsible for delivering it to
the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any
dissemination or copying of this transmission (including
any attachments) is strictly prohibited. If you have
received this email in error, please notify the sender by
email reply. Thank you.

_______________________________________________
landten mailing list
landten at lists.flabarrpptl.org
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/private/landten/attachments/20120131/9b003365/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 31534 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/private/landten/attachments/20120131/9b003365/attachment-0001.jpg>