[RPPTL LandTen] Transfer Case from Circuit to County

[Jeffrey Mazor]

I think that's Adrian hit the nail on the head. Ownership and possession
are entirely different issues. Furthermore, the fact that he filed a claim
in circuit court should have, and I suppose I should emphasize the word
should, have no effect on the county court case.
On May 6, 2014 1:59 PM, "Manuel Farach" <MFarach at richmangreer.com> wrote:

>   Arlene,
>
> The case is more complicated than it seems because the exercise of an
> option (if one does exist in this case) may create an equitable conversion
> of the oral contract to purchase. Again, this is a little complicated but
> Florida actually follows the minority rule and holds that an option to
> purchase is not an interest in real property. If it’s not an interest in
> real property, then I don’t believe the Statute of Frauds applies (but I’d
> love for you to show me otherwise)
>
> Thanks
>
>
>
>
>
>  ------------------------------
>
>  Manuel Farach / Of Counsel - Board Certified in Real Estate Law and
> Business Litigation by The Florida Bar
>
> Richman Greer P.A.
> One Clearlake Centre
> Suite 1504
> 250 Australian Avenue South
> West Palm Beach, Florida 33401
> Office: 561.803.3500
> Fax: 561.820.1608
> Direct: 561.803.3501
> Email: MFarach at richmangreer.com
> www.RichmanGreer.com
>
> U.S. Treasury Regulation Circular 230 requires us to advise you that
> written communications issued by us are not intended to be and cannot be
> relied upon to avoid penalties that may be imposed by the Internal Revenue
> Service.
>
> Incoming emails are filtered which may delay receipt. This email is
> personal to the named recipient(s) and may be privileged and confidential.
> If you are not the intended recipient, you received this in error. If so,
> any review, dissemination, or copying of this email is prohibited. Please
> immediately notify us by email and delete the original message..
>
>  ------------------------------
>
>   *From:* landten-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:
> landten-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org] *On Behalf Of *Arlene C. Udick
> *Sent:* Tuesday, May 06, 2014 1:46 PM
> *To:* 'RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee'
> *Subject:* Re: [RPPTL LandTen] Transfer Case from Circuit to County
>
>
>
> Dear Manny,
>
>
>
> I may be missing something, but I believe the 2 claims are unrelated and
> that you can go forward with the eviction, notwithstanding the alleged oral
> option to purchase.  It seems that the circuit court case has a statute of
> frauds issue, and unless the lawyer took some action relying on the option
> to purchase, the case should be dismissed for failure to state a claim
> since there is no writing to enforce the option.  Arlene
>
>
>
> *From:* landten-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:
> landten-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org] *On Behalf Of *Manuel Farach
> *Sent:* Tuesday, May 06, 2014 12:05 PM
> *To:* RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
> *Subject:* [RPPTL LandTen] Transfer Case from Circuit to County
>
>
>
> Does anyone have case law/practical suggestions for this fact situation?
>
> My client gives notice to leave/files for eviction against his month to
> month tenant as my client has a buyer for the property. I file for
> eviction  in county court, but tenant (who is a lawyer) files suit in
> circuit court claiming he has an oral option to purchase the property by
> matching the price.
>
> Any case law on this? I’m drawing a blank on my research as it appears to
> be under Rule 1.060 but there are no cases on this narrow issue
>
> Thanks in advance
>
> Manny
>  ------------------------------
>
> [image: Image removed by sender.]
>
> Manuel Farach / Of Counsel - Board Certified in Real Estate Law and
> Business Litigation by The Florida Bar
>
> Richman Greer P.A.
> One Clearlake Centre
> Suite 1504
> 250 Australian Avenue South
> West Palm Beach, Florida 33401
> Office: 561.803.3500
> Fax: 561.820.1608
> Direct: 561.803.3501
> Email: MFarach at richmangreer.com
> www.RichmanGreer.com
>
> [image: Image removed by sender.]
>
> U.S. Treasury Regulation Circular 230 requires us to advise you that
> written communications issued by us are not intended to be and cannot be
> relied upon to avoid penalties that may be imposed by the Internal Revenue
> Service.
>
> Incoming emails are filtered which may delay receipt. This email is
> personal to the named recipient(s) and may be privileged and confidential.
> If you are not the intended recipient, you received this in error. If so,
> any review, dissemination, or copying of this email is prohibited. Please
> immediately notify us by email and delete the original message..
>  ------------------------------
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/pipermail/landten/attachments/20140506/6761fd3b/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 602 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/landten/attachments/20140506/6761fd3b/image002.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 596 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/landten/attachments/20140506/6761fd3b/image001.jpg>