MIAMI FOURTH, LLC, APPELLANT,
v.
GC LOUNGE, LLC, 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.
Landlord's eviction action against tenant was affirmed on the ground that landlord failed to comply with the lease's contractual requirement to deliver a default notice by certified mail to the tenant's address, but the trial court's determination on the merits was vacated as premature.
A landlord must strictly comply with contractual conditions precedent to filing an eviction action, including delivering a default notice by certified mail to the address specified in the lease.
[1] A landlord must strictly comply with contractual conditions precedent to filing an eviction action, and failure to deliver a required default notice by certified mail to…
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 intelligenceMiami Fourth, LLC, a landlord, filed an eviction action against GC Lounge, LLC, a tenant, but failed to deliver the required default notice by certifi…
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 Filing Suit cases and more on FLexlaw
In this eviction action, Miami Fourth, LLC, the landlord, appeals a final judgment entered in favor of GC Lounge, LLC, the tenant. The trial court concluded that the landlord failed (1) to comply with a contractual condition precedent to filing the action — delivering the default notice “by certified mail, return receipt requested, to the parties’ respective addresses- set forth in the [lease’s] preamble”— and (2) to prove a material breach of the lease agreement. Because competent, substantial evidence supports the trial court’s finding that the landlord failed to deliver the default notice to the tenant’s address, we affirm on this issue. See generally Stevens v. Cricket Club Condo., Inc., 784 So.2d 517, 518 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001) (quoting GNB, Inc. v. United Danco Batteries, Inc., 627 So.2d 492, 493 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993)) (“As an appellate court, it is not our function to reweigh the evidence but, rather, to view the record to determine if it contains competent and substantial evidence to support the conclusions of the trier of fact.”).
In regards to the second issue, any determination on the merits of the landlord’s claims was premature in light of its failure to comply with a contractual condition precedent to filing suit. We therefore vacate that portion of the final judgment.
Affirmed, in part, and vacated, in part.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Michele K. Feinzig, P.A. v. Deehl & Carlson, P.A., 176 So. 3d 305 (Fla. 3d DCA 2015)…y on the Fee Appeal. II. Standard of Review We review the trial court’s final judgment in the Main Appeal to determine whether the trial court’s findings of fact are supported by competent substantial evidence. Miami Fourth, LLC v. GC Lounge, LLC, 137 So. 3d 1073 (Fla. 3d DCA 2014). We review de novo the trial court’s interpretation of contract law. Gray v. D & J Indus., Inc., 875 So. 2d 683 (Fla. 3d DCA. 2004) (Mem). When the trial court resolves an issue by a grant of summary judgment, our review is also d…
-
Gulfside, Inc. v. Lexington Ins. Co. (M.D. Fla. 2021)…y Ltd. P’ship, 211 So. 3d 117, 121 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017) (same); Vest v. Travelers Ins., 753 So. 2d 1270, 1276 (Fla. 2000); Neate v. Cypress Club Condo., Inc., 718 So. 2d 390, 392 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1998); Miami Fourth, LLC v. GC Lounge, LLC, 137 So. 3d 1073, 1074 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014). given the EUO noncompliance. Until the matter ripens, a forfeiture determination on the merits is unnecessary. As the Order recognized, some cases support Lexington’s argument. The Court simply disagreed a…
Authorities Cited
- State v. In the Interest of M.J., 627 So. 2d 492 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993)
- Stevens v. Cricket Club Condo., Inc., 784 So. 2d 517 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001)
- GNB, Inc. v. United Danco Batteries, Inc., 627 So. 2d 492 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993)