WM. CAMP, APPELLANT,
v.
A. CARY ELLIS, JOS. A. HICKS AND DAVID HARRISON, 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 Florida Supreme Court affirmed a lower court's decision to dismiss a bill seeking to enjoin the setting aside of property as homestead exemption and to establish a lien for rent. The court found that waivers of homestead exemption and liens for rent in an expired lease did not extend to the period of tenancy by sufferance that followed.
No, the waiver of homestead exemption and the lien for rent did not extend beyond the term of the written lease. The court held that these provisions were not implicitly extended by the tenant holding over.
“Even if the waiver of homestead right was effective for any purpose, such waiver was not extended after the expiration of the period of the written lease.”
Establishes that the waiver of homestead rights did not carry over after the lease expired.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceA complainant filed a bill seeking to prevent property from being set aside as a homestead exemption and to establish a lien for rent. The bill was ba…
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 Waiver Of Homestead Rights cases and more on FLexlaw
Per Curiam.
A bill was filed to enjoin the setting aside of property as a homestead exemption and to have a lien decreed against the property for rent. A demurrer to the bill was sustained. The complainant not desiring to amend, the bill was dismissed and the complainant appealed. It appears that a written lease for a period of two years had expired. By its terms the lease purported to waive the right of the lessee to homestead exemptions, and to give a lien upon the goods on the premises for rent payable under the provisions of the lease. After the lease expired the lessee continued in possession and under the statute became a tenant by sufferance or at will. See §4 Chap. 5441 Acts 1905, §2519a Compiled Laws 1914.
The relief sought was for rent due for the occupancy of the premises after the expiration of the written lease. Even if the waiver of homestead right was effective for any purpose, such waiver was not extended after the expiration of the period of the written lease. Likewise, if the lien was effective for rent due for the period of the lease it did not exist for rent due for a period after the lease term had expired.
There was no extension of the attempted waiver of the exemption; and an express written waiver could not be extended by implication merely by reason of the tenant holding over particularly when by statute the occupancy after the period of the lease is a tenancy by sufferance or at will.
Affirmed.
All concur.