KENNETH NASH AND LAWRENCE NASH, APPELLANTS,
v.
N.B. HUNT, APPELLEE
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.
Florida appellate court affirmed judgment for forcible entry against tenant who prematurely occupied leased premises, holding that forcible entry remains available despite statutory restrictions on unlawful detainer for residential tenancies, and affirmed dismissal of counterclaim for specific performance based on the tenant's breach.
Forcible entry is a valid remedy for residential tenancies despite statutory restrictions on unlawful detainer, and a tenant's premature possession constitutes breach of a land-sale contract as a matter of law.
[1] Forcible entry remains a valid remedy for residential tenancies notwithstanding statutory restrictions on unlawful detainer under Florida Statutes sections 82.02, 82.04,…
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 intelligence“the legislature has not abrogated the remedy of forcible entry”
Court distinguishing between unlawful detainer (restricted for residential tenancies) and forcible entry (still available)
Hunt leased premises to Nash, and the next day the parties agreed to sell the same property. Nash entered into possession prior to the agreed time, pr…
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 Forcible Entry cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Hunt entered into an agreement to lease the subject premises to Nash. The next day, the parties entered into an agreement for the sale of the same property. Claiming that Nash entered into possession of the premises prior to the time agreed, Hunt filed the instant suit for forcible entry. Nash counterclaimed for specific performance of the land-sale contract. The trial judge properly tried the forcible entry claim prior to the equitable counterclaim and a verdict was entered in favor of Hunt. The trial court subsequently dismissed the counterclaim. We affirm the jury verdict on the forcible entry claim. In doing so, we necessarily must recede from our pronouncement in Gonzalez v. Benoit, 424 So. 2d 957 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983) to the effect that forcible entry is not a remedy for a residential tenancy. While it is clearly true that the remedy of unlawful detainer has been declared inapplicable to residential tenancies, see Sections 82.02, 82.04 and 82.081(2), Florida Statutes (1981), Trawick’s Florida Practice and Procedure § 31-5 (1982), the legislature has not abrogated the remedy of forcible entry.
We also affirm the dismissal of the defendant’s counterclaim for specific performance because the jury determination that the defendant prematurely and forcibly entered into possession demonstrated as a matter of law that defendant breached the written land sale contract.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Mayor's Jewelers, Inc. v. State of Cal. Pub. Emps'. Ret. Sys., 685 So. 2d 904 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996)…injury is an injury of such nature that it cannot be redressed in a court of law; an injury for which monetary compensation will not suffice.” Gonzalez v. Benoit, 424 So. 2d 957, 959 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983), receded from on other grounds, Nash v. Hunt, 434 So. 2d 51 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983). In other words, if the party seeking equitable relief has a right to monetary compensation that is fair and adequate, then the court lacks equitable jurisdiction to enter an injunction. As we have just seen, however, in the same…
Authorities Cited
- Nestor Gonzalez v. Francoise Benoit, 424 So. 2d 957 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)