STATE, EX REL. ROBERTS, ET AL
v.
SNOWDEN, JUSTICE OF THE PEACE, ET AL.
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.
A circuit court granted a writ of prohibition preventing a justice of the peace from hearing a tenant removal action where the notice to quit demanded $665, exceeding the justice of the peace's $100 jurisdictional limit. The court held that the demand amount in a notice to quit is a jurisdictional prerequisite that must fall within the justice of the peace's constitutional subject matter jurisdiction.
The court held that since the notice to quit is a jurisdictional prerequisite to commencement of a removal of tenant action, any demand for an amount in excess of $100 exceeds the subject matter jurisdiction of the justice of the peace courts, and therefore a writ of prohibition must issue.
[1] A notice to quit demanding an amount in excess of $100 exceeds the subject matter jurisdiction of Florida justice of the peace courts in a tenant removal action.
[2] Service of a notice to quit is a jurisdictional prerequisite to the commencement of a tenant removal action under chapter 83 of the Florida Statutes.
Previewing 2 of 3 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“that service of said notice is a jurisdictional prerequisite to commencement of a removal of tenant action under chapter 83 of the Florida Statutes”
Establishes that the notice to quit is mandatory and jurisdictional to the removal action
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceRose Roberts and other occupants were served with a notice to quit under Florida Statute 83.20(2) demanding either $665 or possession of the premises …
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 Notice To Quit cases and more on FLexlaw
Writ of prohibition: This cause came on to be finally heard by this court on the suggestion for writ of prohibition of the petitioners, and this court having found that case no. 70C-1784 currently pending in the justice of the peace court of district no. 1 of Dade County is an action to remove a tenant, specifically Rose Roberts and all occupants; and that the “notice to quit” served pursuant to F. S. 83.20(2) demanded the amount of $665 or possession of the premises within three days of service; and that service of said notice is a jurisdictional prerequisite to commencement of a removal of tenant action under chapter 83 of the Florida Statutes; and that art. 5, §11(2) of the Florida Constitution limits the civil jurisdiction of the justices of the peace of Florida to those “cases at law in which the demand or value of the property involved does not exceed $100...” and that since the notice to quit in a removal of tenant action is jurisdictional, any demand for an amount in excess of $100 exceeds the subject matter jurisdiction of the justice of the peace courts of Florida.
It is ordered and adjudged that respondents Charles Snowden, as justice of the peace of district no. 1 of Dade County, and Charles Nachman, as constable of district no. 1 of Dade County, are hereby prohibited from trying or enforcing the removal of tenant action presently pending in the justice of the peace court for district no. 1 of Dade County against petitioners Rose Roberts and all occupants, case no. 70C-1784; and are hereby prohibited from trying and/or enforcing any removal of tenant action wherein the defendant-tenant is a member of petitioner’s class. Petitioner’s class shall be defined as those defendants in removal of tenant actions who have allegedly been served a “notice to quit” which demands an amount in excess of $100 or possession of the premises within three days.