[RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60

Thu Jul 30 05:34:27 PDT 2015

Unless there is a provision in the Lease which states that it includes fees/costs relating to the determination of said fees/costs….had a judge bring that to my attention once, and now I include it in every document where attorneys’ fees could be recovered.

Les H. Stevens, Esquire
Les H. Stevens, P.A.
5301 North Federal Highway
Suite 130
Boca Raton, Florida 33487
Tel. - (561) 989-9797
Fax - (561) 989-8484
E-Mail - lesstevens at earthlink.net

________________________________________________________________________________________

OUR OFFICE NO LONGER ACCEPTS CASHIER'S OR BANK CHECKS AT CLOSING.  ALL FUNDS  MUST BE RECEIVED IN THE FORM OF A SAME DAY WIRE TRANSFER ONLY (NO ACH TRANSFERS).  

THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE INDIVIDUAL OR ENTITY TO WHOM IT IS ADDRESSED, AND MAY CONTAIN INFORMATION THAT IS PRIVILEGED, CONFIDENTIAL AND/OR OTHERWISE EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS TRANSMITTAL IN ERROR, PLEASE DELETE IT AND NOTIFY THIS OFFICE IMMEDIATELY

From: landten-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Sebastian Jaramillo
Sent: Thursday, July 30, 2015 8:24 AM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60

My understanding is that you are not allowed to collect attorney's fees on you Motion for Attorney's Fees. In other words, you cannot get fees on fees. 

Sebastian Jaramillo, Esq.

  <http://lawjb.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/logo-jb.png> 

66 W. Flagler St Suite 500 Miami, FL 33130
Tel:  (305) 600-3805 Fax: (786) 347-5562
www.lawjb.com

This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited.

IMPORTANT TAX NOTICE: This communication is not written to be used, and cannot be used, by a taxpayer for the purpose of avoiding penalties that may be asserted against the taxpayer under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended. 

On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 7:28 AM, Gioia DeCarlo <gdc at dvllclegal.com> wrote:

The plaintiff’s case was dismissed.  The judgment goes against the plaintiff (fair result, the plaintiff is the party that caused the unnecceary legal fees for your client).

Now, it may be the attorney filed with the wrong plaintiff in error or on the attorney’s advice, the case was brought by the wrong party and if so, maybe the attorney will step up and do the right thing and pay, but that’s between the plaintiff’s attorney and the plaintiff.  The lawyer has no direct liability to your client of which I am aware.

Unless you get an agreement and the money right way, file your Motion to Determine Enititlement and To Tax Fees & Costs because you only have 30 days and the filing of it will likely make the other side realize they have to pay (you did prevail)—  include your time for any research and drafting the motion and ask for the time that will be spent at hearing the motion.   I doubt the fees will be so much that they will insist on a fee hearing to determine a reasonable fee amount (I am confident you will win on entitlement).  I have never had to go that far — the times my client was entitled, the other side paid.   But if you do go to a fee hearing, my understanding is that the plaintiff will then have to pay your time to prepare & attend the fee hearing and for your expert’s review of file and attendance at the fee hearing, all which make the fee hearing impractical for the plaintiff — even attending the hearing on your motion to detemine and tax is crazy for them to go.  They will pay.

Gioia

Gdc at dvllclegal.com

This e-mail transmission and any documents, files or previous e-mail messages attached to it, are confidential and are protected by the attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine. If you are not the intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, disclosure, copying, dissemination, distribution or use of any of the information contained in, or attached to this e-mail transmission is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately notify me by forwarding this e-mail to  <mailto:Info at dvllclegal.com> Info at dvllclegal.com, or by telephone at (845) 321-0242 <tel:%28845%29%20321-0242>  and then delete the message and its attachments from your computer.

From: <landten-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org> on behalf of Leonard Cabral <LensLaw at Lenslaw.com>
Reply-To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee <landten at lists.flabarrpptl.org>
Date: Wednesday, July 29, 2015 at 10:37 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee <landten at lists.flabarrpptl.org>
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60

I actually had a question a bout that.  Who do I ask for fees if the plaintiff is the wrong party, the attorney as sanctions?  

I may be able to call the attorney and work out fees but I still filed a motion for costs and attorney fees.

Leonard P. Cabral

Leonardcabral at lenslaw.com

From: landten-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Gioia DeCarlo
Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2015 2:51 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60

Hi Leonard

I hope you asked for legal fees!   

If not, you have 30 days to file your motion for entitlement (under 83.48) and to tax fees and costs under Fl R. Civ. Pro. 1.525. 

This e-mail transmission and any documents, files or previous e-mail messages attached to it, are confidential and are protected by the attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine. If you are not the intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, disclosure, copying, dissemination, distribution or use of any of the information contained in, or attached to this e-mail transmission is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately notify me by forwarding this e-mail to  <mailto:Info at dvllclegal.com> Info at dvllclegal.com, or by telephone at (845) 321-0242 <tel:%28845%29%20321-0242>  and then delete the message and its attachments from your computer.

From: <landten-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org> on behalf of Leonard Cabral <LensLaw at Lenslaw.com>
Reply-To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee <landten at lists.flabarrpptl.org>
Date: Tuesday, July 28, 2015 at 1:58 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee <landten at lists.flabarrpptl.org>
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60

The problem with tenant defense is when the client brings in the complaint and the time the law requires a response. That doesn’t leave much time for research that I can do but not it that timeframe. So I must rely on the great lawyers on this list who have this information at their finger tips.  Thanks again.  YOU MADE MY DAY.  

If Harry reads this, you should be able to figure out why this should also make your day. 

Leonard P. Cabral, Esq.

Leonardcabral at lenslaw.com

Please disregard inadvertent misspellings  

From:landten-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Gioia DeCarlo
Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2015 11:05 AM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60

Glad to hear it!  And glad to be able help!

Gioia 

This e-mail transmission and any documents, files or previous e-mail messages attached to it, are confidential and are protected by the attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine. If you are not the intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, disclosure, copying, dissemination, distribution or use of any of the information contained in, or attached to this e-mail transmission is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately notify me by forwarding this e-mail to  <mailto:Info at dvllclegal.com> Info at dvllclegal.com, or by telephone at (845) 321-0242 <tel:%28845%29%20321-0242>  and then delete the message and its attachments from your computer.

From: <landten-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org> on behalf of Leonard Cabral <LensLaw at Lenslaw.com>
Reply-To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee <landten at lists.flabarrpptl.org>
Date: Tuesday, July 28, 2015 at 10:56 AM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee <landten at lists.flabarrpptl.org>
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60

Thank you for all you help.  At the hearing on Plaintiff’s “Motion to Re-Serve and Amend” the judge stated with my motion to dismiss for standing.  My motion was granted.  Landlords cannot avoid the basic rule of standing J.  

Leonard P. Cabral

Leonardcabral at lenslaw.com

From:landten-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Gioia DeCarlo
Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 11:06 AM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60

Oops!  Just realized I attached the wrong Glynn document  that although plaintiff must have standing at time of filing complaint, the affirmative defense of no standing must be raised or it is waived.  Here it is. 

Gioia

This e-mail transmission and any documents, files or previous e-mail messages attached to it, are confidential and are protected by the attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine. If you are not the intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, disclosure, copying, dissemination, distribution or use of any of the information contained in, or attached to this e-mail transmission is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately notify me by forwarding this e-mail to  <mailto:Info at dvllclegal.com> Info at dvllclegal.com, or by telephone at (845) 321-0242 <tel:%28845%29%20321-0242>  and then delete the message and its attachments from your computer.

From: <landten-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org> on behalf of Eddy Leal <el at leallegal.com>
Reply-To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee <landten at lists.flabarrpptl.org>
Date: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 at 10:08 AM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee <landten at lists.flabarrpptl.org>
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60

You might find the attached foreclosure case helpful in your search. 

Citing to the Jeff-Ray and Progressive, Second District recognizes that standing has to be met at the inception of the lawsuit. "The appellate courts are nonetheless compelled to reverse based on the district courts' application of a long line of supreme court cases applying the general principle that “the plaintiff's lack of standing at the inception of the case is not a defect that may be cured by the acquisition of standing after the case is filed.” Attached is the case. 

Eddy Leal 

Eddy Leal, P.A. 

201 South Biscayne Blvd, Suite 2650

Miami, FL 33131

Office: 305-914-0071

Fax: 305-901-2378

E-Mail: el at leallegal.com

On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 9:23 AM, Gioia DeCarlo <gdc at dvllclegal.com> wrote:

Standing must exist at time of the filing of the lawsuit.  If not, the case must be dismissed.  Jeff-Ray case, Progressive case, attached.  Lack of standing at time of filing cannot be cured after the fact by substitution of parites — one can’t transfer what one doesn’t have.    Lack of standing, however, is a raise-or-waive affirmative defense (see Glynn case attached).  

Fl.R.Civ.Pro 1.260 allows for substitution of parites if the the interest is transferred from the original party to another by order of court.  One who lacks interest in the subject matter cannot transfer the interest to another.  The case must be dismissed and re-filed by one who has standing.

Note there are numerous standing cases in the foreclosure context as banks were filing all the time without standing.

Hope this helps.

Gioia

This e-mail transmission and any documents, files or previous e-mail messages attached to it, are confidential and are protected by the attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine. If you are not the intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, disclosure, copying, dissemination, distribution or use of any of the information contained in, or attached to this e-mail transmission is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately notify me by forwarding this e-mail to  <mailto:Info at dvllclegal.com> Info at dvllclegal.com, or by telephone at (845) 321-0242 <tel:%28845%29%20321-0242>  and then delete the message and its attachments from your computer.

From: <landten-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org> on behalf of Leonard Cabral <LensLaw at Lenslaw.com>
Reply-To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee <landten at lists.flabarrpptl.org>
Date: Monday, July 20, 2015 at 11:40 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee <landten at lists.flabarrpptl.org>
Subject: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60

Group:

83.60(1)(a)  “The landlord must be given an opportunity to cure a deficiency in a notice or in the pleadings before dismissal of the action.”  A complaint was filed by an Orlando attorney with the wrong landlord’s name. (no standing). -He has now a motion to amend pursuant to 83.60 to change the name of the plaintiff. Is standing a deficiency in the pleadings that can be amended?Does anyone have the legislative intent they are willing to share?  Any ideas welcome.

Leonard P. Cabral, Esq.

212 North Park Ave., 

Sanford, FL  32771

Leonardcabral at lenslaw.com

(407)330-4998 <tel:%28407%29330-4998> 

The information herein is legally privileged For Official Use Only and protected under the Privacy Acto of 1974, as amended. Unauthorized disclosure or misue of this Personal Information may result in criminal and/or civil penalties." If you have received this e-mail message in error, please reply to sender immediately with the statement "RECEIVED IN ERROR"and destroy the original message.

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

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

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

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

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

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

_______________________________________________
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/20150730/21b40f2d/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 20321 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/landten/attachments/20150730/21b40f2d/image001-0001.png>