JIMMY AND DALE WARD, PETITIONERS,
v.
ESTATE OF MYRTLE N. WARD, RESPONDENT
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 circuit court departed from the essential requirements of law by affirming the county court's exercise of jurisdiction when the petitioners asserted an equitable interest in the property.
Petitioners sought certiorari review of a circuit court decision affirming an eviction order from county court. Petitioners asserted a claim to an equ…
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 Equitable Interest cases and more on FLexlaw
Petitioners seek certiorari review of a circuit court decision affirming an eviction order rendered by a county court. For the reasons that follow, we grant the petition for a writ of certiorari.
By statute, county courts exercise jurisdiction to decide actions for eviction, but circuit courts have exclusive original jurisdiction in ejectment actions. See §§ 26.012(2)(f), 88.59(2), Fla. Stat. (2006) (providing, respectively, for circuit courts’ jurisdiction in cases involving ejectment and for county courts’ jurisdiction in cases involving eviction). In their answer to the complaint for eviction filed in the county court in this case, petitioners asserted a claim to an equitable interest in the property they inhabited, which should have been resolved by the circuit court. See Toledo v. Escamilla, 962 So.2d 1028, 1030 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007) (holding that “ejectment, not eviction, was the proper remedy, and the matter should have been transferred to the circuit court” when defendant in eviction action “asserted in her answer that she was not a tenant and that she had an equitable interest in the property”). We agree with the Third District in Toledo and conclude that the circuit court departed from the essential requirements of law in affirming the county court’s exercise of jurisdiction of this matter.
Accordingly, the petition for writ of cer-tiorari is GRANTED. We QUASH the circuit court’s order and REMAND the case to the circuit court. We express no opinion as to the merit of petitioners’ claim of an interest in the property at issue.
WEBSTER, and VAN NORTWICK, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Dupree v. Shekina Dellmar, 323 So. 3d 342 (Fla. 3d DCA 2021)…d Trading, LLC, 239 So. 3d 765, 770 (Fla. 3d DCA 2018) (explaining that the county 4 court lacked jurisdiction over an eviction action where the purported tenant claimed to have an equitable interest in the property); Ward v. Estate of Ward, 1 So. 3d 238, 239 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008) (“In their answer to the complaint for eviction filed in the county court. . .petitioners asserted a claim to an equitable interest in the property they inhabited, which should have been resolved by the circuit court.”);…
-
Golden Cape of Fla., Inc. v. de Ospina, 324 So. 3d 558 (Fla. 3d DCA 2021)…o, 10 So. 3d 1110, 1111 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009) (citation omitted). “By statute, county courts exercise jurisdiction to decide actions for eviction, but circuit courts have exclusive original jurisdiction in ejectment actions.” Ward v. Est. of Ward, 1 So. 3d 238, 239 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008) (citing § 26.012(2)(f), Fla. Stat. (providing for circuit courts' jurisdiction in cases involving ejectment); § 83.59(2), Fla. Stat. (providing for county courts' jurisdiction in cases involving eviction)); see Pro-Art De…
-
Mesnikoff v. Fq Backyard Trading, LLC, 239 So. 3d 765 (Fla. 3d DCA 2018)…perty, ejectment, not eviction, was the proper remedy, and the matter should have been transferred to the circuit court [because] [t]he circuit court has ‘exclusive original jurisdiction’ over ejectment actions”); see also Ward v. Estate of Ward, 1 So. 3d 238, 239 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008) (concluding that “the circuit court departed from the essential requirements of law in affirming the county court’s exercise of jurisdiction” in a complaint for eviction where the defendants in the eviction action “assert…
Previewing 3 of 10 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Maite Toledo v. Escamilla, 962 So. 2d 1028 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007)