SY COLE AND CLYDE MOORE, APPELLANTS,
v.
SEYMOUR MENDELSOHN, MENDELSOHN'S OF NEW YORK, AND C & J DELI DEPOT, APPELLEES
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court reversed the county court's denial of eviction and remanded to circuit court because the eviction issue was inextricably interwoven with the tenants' affirmative defenses and counterclaim, requiring unified consideration.
An eviction order must not be decided separately from affirmative defenses and counterclaims that are inextricably interwoven with the eviction issue; instead, all issues must be resolved together by the circuit court.
[1] When an eviction action and affirmative defenses or counterclaims are inextricably interwoven, the eviction issue must not be decided separately but rather all issues mus…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceLandlords Cole and Moore sued tenants Mendelsohn, Mendelsohn's of New York, and C & J Deli Depot for eviction from leased business property. The tenan…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Judicial Jurisdiction cases and more on FLexlaw
WALDEN, Judge.
Landlords, Sy Cole and Clyde Moore, filed suit in the county court against the tenants, Seymour Mendelsohn, Mendel-sohn’s of New York, and C & J Deli Depot, seeking to evict the tenants and regain possession of certain leased business property. The tenants answered with a general denial, filed affirmative defenses, and asserted a counterclaim. The county judge, in effect, severed the eviction action and upon trial denied the eviction action. Since the issues contained in the affirmative defenses and counterclaims were within the jurisdiction of the circuit court, the county court transferred the remainder of the case, the issues made by the affirmative defenses and counterclaim, to the circuit court. The landlords appeal the order in the county court denying eviction relief. This court has jurisdiction per rule 9.130(a)(6), Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure.
Upon review and analysis it is apparent that the matter of eviction is inextricably interwoven into the issues contained in the affirmative defenses and counterclaim. Thus, the order denying eviction was premature. Upon authority of Herrell v. Seyfarth, Shaw, Fairwealher & Geraldson, 491 So. 2d 1173 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986), the order of eviction must be vacated and the whole cause remanded to the circuit court with instructions to rule upon the question of eviction after the circuit court has considered the merits of the affirmative defenses and counterclaim filed by the tenants.
Reversed and remanded to the circuit court for further proceedings consistent herewith.
HERSEY, C.J., and GLICKSTEIN, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Maida Vale, Inc. v. Abbey Rd. Plaza Corp., 96 So. 3d 1027 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012)…ims or affirmative defenses overlap or are “inextricably interwoven into” the issues that must be decided in the eviction action, it is error to rule upon the eviction claim without resolving the matters raised by the tenant. See Cole v. Mendelsohn, 531 So. 2d 397, 397 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988) (citing Herrell v. Seyfarth, Shaw, Fairweather & Geraldson, 491 So. 2d 1173 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986)). See also 3618 Lantana Rd. Partners, 57 So. 3d at 968-69 (reversing involuntary dismissal of eviction claim based upon trial co…
Authorities Cited
- Herrell v. Seyfarth, 491 So. 2d 1173 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986)