DIANA MARVEZ
v.
STEVEN CANDELARIA AND MAYELIN CANDELARIA
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.
Diana Marvez appealed the trial court's dismissal with prejudice of her eviction suit against Steven and Mayelin Candelaria. The appellate court reversed, holding that under Florida law effective July 1, 2013, landlords must be given an opportunity to cure deficiencies in eviction notices before dismissal, and remanded for dismissal without prejudice.
The trial court's dismissal with prejudice was reversed. Under Florida Statute § 83.60(1)(a), effective July 1, 2013, the landlord must be given an opportunity to cure a deficiency in a notice or in the pleadings before dismissal of the action. The case was remanded for dismissal without prejudice and with leave to amend.
[1] A dismissal with prejudice is a harsh determination that ends an action without addressing the merits, especially when the complaint's deficiency is amenable to amendment…
[2] Florida law requires that a landlord be given an opportunity to cure a deficiency in a notice or pleadings before dismissal of an action.
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“a dismissal with prejudice is a harsh determination that ends an action without addressing the merits. Dismissal with prejudice is especially harsh where the failure of the complaint is amenable to amendment.”
Establishes the legal standard for when dismissal with prejudice is appropriate and the policy against dismissing with prejudice when defects can be cured.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceDiana Marvez filed suit to evict Steven Candelaria and Mayelin Candelaria. The Candelarias moved to dismiss the action, asserting that Marvez's evicti…
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.
to this Court by appeal a
YOU ARE HE
, nd after d
REBY CO
with the ' ' ue consid
MMANDE
opinion of Q 1%?‘ 5%\K\1.. we p0. Lg zL W4 ‘lgwa ¢,\1§i33‘5h i -V1» eration th D that s this COU proced e cou uch further proceedings be h RT attached hereto and in ure and laws of the STATE ad in s ' corporat
OF FLO
Low aid cause in acco ed as part of this order, and with the RIDA. er Tribunal Case Number(s): 13-0206 WITNESS the Honorable Abby Cynarnon, Adrni ' Court ofthe Eleventh Judicial Circ ' February, 20 Mandate rev. 10/22/2008 52-CC 25 nistrative J uit ofFlorid 15. udge oftheAppellate Division ofthe Circuit a and the seal ofthe said Circuit Court at Mia ' PM xi‘. By:1‘ ~--P~Y_ ,¢1@f7<..%?r¢vw"fS“i “V “ ‘Q ii ‘ i I ,4- -’ I‘ L.-.’ £3X A ac el ...'.L - A True Co ar.véy»R fy . meA " w /.13 , l \4 mi, this 10TH K '.
LN-.W
ssar I rt having rdance rules of day of mnmvs ~;qss\r»1'i\“ [*2] ~$— Gm I NOT FINAL UNTIL Tlgi FOR FILING ‘
MOTION FOR REHEARING EXPIRES
OR, IF FILED, DISPOSED OF. IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE
ELEVENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND
FOR MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA
APPELLATE DIVISION
DIANA MARVEZ, Case No: 14-076 AP Appellant, L.T. Case: 13-20652 CC 25 v. TI?! .-"I ??:‘£ ‘ i STEVEN CANDELARIA and MAYELIN F: :3 " CANDELARIA, , ~71 (:3 M331all ..--a'><> I A .21-a 2; . 5., rt“ .. Appellees. ._.- A \ , _7,. /‘>1 .»-. 1 (-—~,r ,7 ..1._..q>' ‘ , vi-1 Opinion filed: O\\®etv=\l12/v \0\ 10 \'-t U “T3 .1.) Uu w-»_ L-,01.; 8- An Appeal from an order of dismissal in the Co t C un y ouit in and for Miami-Dade County. Robert D. Devin, for Appellant. Helen Ann Hauser of Restani Dittmar & H , auser, P.A., and Keith Diamond for Appellee. Before: SARAH ZABEL, BERNARD S. SHAPI
PER CURIAM.
RO, NORMA LINDSEY, JJ.
Diana Marvez filed suit to evict Steven Candelaria and Mayelin Candelaria Subsequentl th . y, e Candelarias moved to dismiss the action. The motion to dismiss was granted with prejudice and Marvez appeals. As a preliminary matter, this Court observes that a dismissal with prejudice is a harsh detennination that ends an action without addressing the merits. Dismissal with prejudice is especially harsh where the failure of the complaint is amenable to amendment. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A . v. Reeves, 92 So. 3d 249, 253 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012). Page1 of2 080038 80;‘. 037“
JAQQUELINTBABU-NASSAR
[*3] {V ‘s .D ii . . In the present instance, the motion to dismiss sought dismissal on the grounds that Marvez’s complaint for eviction rested upon a deficient three day notice. The motion further asserted that the wrong lease agreement had been attached to the complaint. This, contend the Candelarias, required dismissal with prejudice. Effective July1, 2013, Florida law changed to require that “[t]he landlord must be given an opportunity to cure a deficiency in a notice or in the pleadings before dismissal of the action.” Fla Stat. 83.60(1)(a). Based upon the foregoing, the Trial Court’s Order ofDismissal REVERSED. The cause is REMANDED to the trial court for entry of an order of dismissal without prejudice and with leave to amend pursuant to section 83.60(1)(a). The Trial Court shall assess appellate fees and costs pursuant to section 83.48, Florida Statues, to the party ultimately prevailing below. (ZABEL, SHAPIRO, LINDSEY, JJ., CONCURRING) kw We/421% Sar Bemard S Shapi Nonna Lindsey Circuit Cou Judge Circuit Court Judge Circuit Court Judge I DA;///w Dt»\\\»\\~\ M//~/9-/4 ‘- aortas rviitrtifiiai-i%r<; . REPRESENTED BY cour~»ii..~;
[*4] O
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE ELEVENTH
JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR MIAMI-DADE
DIANA MARVEZ, AppeIlant(s), vs. STEVEN CANDELARIA and MAYELIN CANDELARIA, Appellee(s).
COUNTY, FLORIDA. APPELLATE DIVISION
CASE NO.: 14-076 AP LOWER COURT CASE NUMBER: 13-o§s65;_3c N 7? ~12 TS 2% gag. age ...“_‘<*c‘>
W.
T 332' ma .7 Upon consideration by the court, Appellees, Motion for Rehearing is hereby: [ ] Granted S2 NW‘ S‘!=6 HY
C 25
MI c:' X? xi -“Y I C"?1"“- fii M Denied BENARD s SHAPIRO, SARAH1 ZABEL, and NORMA s LINDSEY, JJ CONCUR eredmis_lLday of \_(0</I" , 20 /fi_. \ N (‘I \.. rm. ~ IR"1 [J E1
HELEN A HAUSER, ESQ.
200 SE 6TH STREET, STE 603 201 ALHAMBRA CIRCLE, SUITE 1050 FT. LAUDERDALE, FL 33301 CORAL GABLES, FL 33134 Order Grt/Den Mtn. rev. 10/30/2008
KEITH D DIAMOND, ESQ.
3440 HOLLYWOOD BLVD., STE 415 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021 wssvn-nav iminbovi [*5] DIANA MARVEZ, Appellant(s) vs. STEVEN CANDELARIA and MAYELIN CANDELARIA Appellee(s) ,
THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE ELEVENTH
JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR MIAMI-DADE
COUNTY, FLORIDA. APPELLATE
.. 14-076 AP
LOWER COURT CASE NU
13-oii’ Upon consideration by the court, Appellees’ Motion to Strike AppelIant’s “Reply to Appellees’ Motion for Rehearing” is hereby: [ ] Granted :I>{/ Denied Q9 V?“ @.i’:‘.‘5l 4» "‘ Fl,’-.-.<:~ tel” IuI 4%‘
BERNARD S SHAPIRO, SARAH I
I . ZABEL, and NORMA S LINDS t is so ordered this
I L
R \ 1
EY, JJ CONCUR
dayof \lQ4q44£¢/fl, 20 [5 . \\ J . \|;‘\ ss Pro _ I I -/1/Mfifi/'{;4 NORMA S LlINDSEY /~ Z CC:
ROBERT D DEVI N, ESQ.
20o SE 6TH STREET, STE
FT. LA
HELEN A HAUSER, ESQ.
201 ALHAMBRA CIRCLE, SUITE 1050 UDERDALE, FL 33301 CORAL GABLES, FL 33134 /2008 _ . D, ESQ 3440 HOLLYWOOD BLVD., STE 415 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021 Order Grt/Den Mtn. rev. 10/30 *1 jg, 0331 .._v;_1~ 5’ I g\\Q‘I av B1 1*" bIII SW‘