FAY LEW, BY HER NEXT FRIEND AND HUSBAND WILLIAM LEW,
v.
OSCAR MAMBER AND SYLVIA MAMBER, HIS WIFE
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 Florida Supreme Court affirmed the dismissal of a bill of complaint seeking to enjoin a landlord-tenant eviction action. The tenant argued the rental contract was improvident and that, as a married woman, she was not bound by it, but the court found no equity in the bill.
No, the bill of complaint does not have equity. The court held that the allegations of improvidence and the lessee's status as a married woman did not provide a basis for equitable relief to enjoin the eviction.
“There is no equity in the bill and the final order of dismissal is affirmed.”
This quote states the court's conclusion that the tenant's claims lacked sufficient legal basis for equitable intervention.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceA tenant sought to enjoin a landlord-tenant eviction action in county court. The tenant's bill of complaint alleged the rental contract was improviden…
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 Landlord-Tenant Law cases and more on FLexlaw
On appeal we review order dismissing bill of complaint by which it was sought to enjoin the proceeding in a landlord *282and tenant action in the County Judge’s Court of Dade County, wherein the landlord sought to evict the tenant because of default in payment of rent, and to procure decree reforming the rental contract and for other relief.
The main ground stated for relief was that the rental contract was improvident and required the payment of more rent than could be produced from the operation of the property by the tenant. No fraud or over-reaching was charged.
Another ground stated was that the landlord and tenant action could not be maintained because the lessee was a married woman and was, therefore, not bound by the rental contract, although she was joined in the execution thereof by her husband.
There is no equity in the bill and the final order of dismissal is affirmed.
So ordered.
TERRELL, CHAPMAN and ADAMS, JJ., concur.