G. M. C. A. CORPORATION, A FLORIDA CORPORATION, APPELLANT,
v.
NONI, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, JOHN W. GEER AND MARCELLINE GEER, HIS WIFE, APPELLEES
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.
GMCA Corporation, a landlord, appealed a foreclosure decree that gave priority to a chattel mortgage held by the Geers over the landlord's lien for rent. The court held that a landlord's lien attaches at the commencement of tenancy and retains priority over subsequently created chattel liens unless the landlord explicitly subordinates it.
A landlord's lien attaches at the commencement of tenancy and is superior to subsequently created chattel liens unless the landlord takes specific acts to subordinate the lien. The landlord's priority for rent is superior to that of the chattel mortgagees.
“a landlord's lien [pursuant to provision of § 83.08, Fla.Stat., F.S.A.] attaches either at the time of the commencement of a tenancy or when a chattel is brought on the premises”
Establishes the foundational rule for when a landlord's lien attaches under Florida law
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceGMCA leased property to a tenant starting in 1962 under a five-year lease with a five-year renewal option. A liquor license was brought onto the premi…
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.
Involved in this appeal is a priority of liens. We hold that a landlord’s lien [pursuant to provision of § 83.08, Fla.Stat., F.S.A.] attaches either at the time of the commencement of a tenancy or when a chattel is brought on the premises. Lovett v. Lee, 141 Fla. 395, 193 So. 538; McKesson & Robbins, Inc. v. Taft Street Shopping Center, Fla.App. 1966, 184 So.2d 210; 20 Fla.Jur., Landlord & Tenant, § 93. It has been held that a liquor license is subject to a chattel or a landlord’s lien. Yarbrough v. Villeneuve, Fla.App.1964, 160 So.2d 747; Hubbard v. Jebb, Fla.App. 1964, 163 So.2d 307.
The original tenancy in this case commenced in 1962. A liquor license was brought on the premises at, or shortly after, the commencement of the original term of the lease. The original term was for five years, with a five year option. The original parties recognized that the option to extend for an additional five years had been effected and, pursuant to the provisions of the lease, the landlord agreed to assignment of the lessee’s interest to a third party in November of 1967, with the tenancy to commence January 2, 1968. At this time, the original tenants were not released from liability on the lease, although they took from their assignee a note secured by a purchase money mortgage which, among other things, encumbered the liquor license.
The facts were undisputed; the trial judge held the landlord’s lien inferior to the lien created by the chattel mortgage, evidently because of the execution of the assignment and knowledge of the chattel *892mortgage. We reverse. Under the statute and authorities, the landlord’s lien was superior to the subsequently created chattel lien and, without specific acts of the landlord agreeing to subordinate his lien to that of the chattel mortgage, he continued to possess a priority of lien over that of the chattel mortgagee. Little & Son v. Bryan, 100 Fla. 1577, 131 So. 652; National Title Insurance Company v. Mercury Builders, Inc., Fla.App.1960, 124 So.2d 132; 22 Fla. Jur., Mortgages, § 131; 36 Am.Jur., Mortgages, § 222.
Therefore, for the reasons above stated, the final decree of foreclosure here under review is modified to the extent of indicating that the landlord has a priority for rent superior to that possessed by the mortgagees, Geer.
Reversed and remanded, with directions.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Geiger Mut. Agency, Inc. v. Louella F. Wright, 233 So. 2d 444 (Fla. 4th DCA 1970)…ts of the landlord agreeing to subordinate his lien to that of the chattel mortgage, he continues to possess a priority of lien over that of the chattel mortgagee. G. M. C. A. Corporation v. Noni, Inc., Fla. App.1969, Third District Court of Appeal, 227 So. 2d 891, opinion filed November 18, 1969. The Tenant-Miller in his deposition was vague as to the precise time the property mortgaged to Geiger Mutual was brought onto the leased premises. Miller did, however, acknowledge that most of the property that was…
-
Walling Enters., Inc. v. Mathias, 636 So. 2d 1294 (Fla. 1994)…. at 1333. The answer to the first certified question hinges upon the nature of a liquor license, which has been the subject of litigation in Florida for many years. In the opinion below, the district court relied upon G.M.C.A. Corp. v. Noni, Inc., 227 So. 2d 891 (Fla. 3d DCA 1969), and Yarbrough v. Villeneuve, 160 So. 2d 747 (Fla. 1st DCA 1964), for the proposition that a liquor license is subject to a landlord’s statutory lien for rent. Relying upon the reasoning in Yarbrough, the district court explained…
-
Ira Sachs v. Curry-Thomas Hardware, 464 So. 2d 597 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985)…it under his security agreement with the Barneses. After both parties moved for summary judgment, the trial judge denied Sachs’ motion, but granted Curry-Thomas’ motion, citing Section 83.08, Florida Statutes, and G.M.C.A. Corporation v. Noni, Inc., 227 So. 2d 891 (Fla. 3d DCA 1969). Sachs relies for reversal upon his assertion that at the time he allegedly perfected his lien on the equipment and appliances, no lease agreement existed between Curry-Thomas and Barnes covering the property upon which the perso…1 / 2
Previewing 3 of 9 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Lovett v. Lee, 141 Fla. 395 (Fla. 1940)
- Yarbrough v. Villeneuve, 160 So. 2d 747 (Fla. 1st DCA 1964)
- Little v. Bryan, 100 Fla. 1577 (Fla. 1930)
- Paul S. Hubbard for Lundy's, Inc. v. Jebb, 163 So. 2d 307 (Fla. 2d DCA 1964)
- McKESSON & Robbins, Inc. v. Taft St. Shopping Ctr., 184 So. 2d 210 (Fla. 2d DCA 1966)
- Nat'l Title Ins. Co. & Fam. Invs., Inc. v. Mercury Builders, Inc., 124 So. 2d 132 (Fla. 3d DCA 1960)