AUGUSTAS CABRE, APPELLANT,
v.
DOUGLAS BROWN, BETTY L. BROWN, AND M. G. I. C. INDEMNITY CORPORATION, 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.
A Florida appellate court determined the priority of a landlord's lien against a mobile home lien filed pursuant to a conditional sales contract. The court held that the landlord's lien was superior because it arose when the mobile home became property on the leased premises, well before the conditional sales contract lien was perfected.
The landlord's lien is superior to the conditional sales contract lien. The landlord's lien came into existence when the mobile home became property on the leased premises (when the Browns became tenants at sufferance), which preceded the perfection of M.G.I.C.'s conditional sales contract lien by nearly three years.
[1] A landlord's lien for rent attaches to personal property of a tenant usually kept on the premises and is superior to any lien acquired subsequent to the property being br…
[2] A tenant who abandons personal property on leased premises becomes a tenant at sufferance, allowing the landlord to assert a lien against the abandoned property.
Previewing 2 of 4 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“Upon all other property of the lessee or his sub-lessee or assigns, usually kept on the premises. This lien shall be superior to any lien acquired subsequent to the bringing of such property on the premises leased.”
Establishes that under Florida Statute Section 83.08(2), a landlord's lien on property brought onto leased premises is superior to any subsequently acquired lien.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAugustus Cabré purchased two acres of land from Douglas and Betty Brown in November 1973. The Browns left a mobile home on the property that was suppo…
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 Distress For Rent cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
We are asked to determine the priority of two liens, one a landlord’s lien and the other a lien filed pursuant to Section 319.27(2), Florida Statutes (1975), securing a conditional sales contract on a mobile home. We reverse the final judgment and find the landlord’s lien the superior lien.
On November 30, 1973, appellant Augustus Cabré purchased two acres of land from Douglas and Betty Brown. The Browns had a mobile home located on the property which they agreed would be removed within two weeks. This was never done. The trailer remained on the property for almost three years, and Cabré filed an action in September, 1976, asking distress for rent and seeking a lien under Section 83.08, Florida Statutes (1975), for the fair market rental value of the two acre plot.
First Federal Savings and Loan of Gainesville held a lien on the trailer at the time it was abandoned by the Browns. When payments were not made by the Browns, First Federal looked to appellee M.G.I.C., its credit insurer, for payment. M.G.I.C. paid the outstanding amount of the loan but First Federal, rather than assigning its lien to M.G.I.C., filed a satisfaction of the lien on August 22, 1974. It was not until almost two years later, in June, 1976, that the assignment of First Federal’s interest in the mobile home to M.G.I.C. was completed. When distress for rent was sought by the landlord, Cabré, M.G.I.C. counter-claimed asserting its prior possessory right to the mobile home.
The trial judge incorrectly granted judgment to M.G.I.C. for possession of the mobile home. The Browns, upon abandoning the trailer on the property, became tenants at sufferance, and Cabré properly asserted a landlord’s lien against the personalty. Pillans & Smith Co., Inc. v. Lowe, 117 Fla. 249, 157 So. 649 (1934); West’s Drug Stores, Inc. v. Allen Inv. Co., 125 Fla. 823, 170 So. 447 (1936). That lien came into existence not when the action in distress for rent was brought, but when the tenancy came into being. Section 83.08(2) allows a lien to a landlord for rent:
“Upon all other property of the lessee or his sub-lessee or assigns, usually kept on the premises. This lien shall be superior to any lien acquired subsequent to the bringing of such property on the premises leased.”
See Lovett v. Lee, 141 Fla. 395, 193 So. 538 (1940); G.M.C.A. Corp. v. Noni, Inc., 227 So. 2d 891 (Fla. 3d DCA 1969). Because M.G.I.C.’s lien was not perfected until long after the abandonment of the trailer on the property of Cabré, it is clear the landlord’s lien is superior. The final judgment is REVERSED with directions judgment be entered for Cabré.
BOYER, Acting C. J., and MILLS and ERVIN, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Ira Sachs v. Curry-Thomas Hardware, 464 So. 2d 597 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985)…the case law interpreting Section 83.08 and its predecessors requires the commencement of a tenancy before the landlord’s lien will have its statutorily-mandated priority. Waldo v. United States Ramie Corp., 74 So. 2d 106 (Fla.1954); Cabre v. Brown, 355 So. 2d 846 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978). Here, Sachs contends, no lease had been consummated between Curry-Thomas and Barnes until after Sachs acquired his lien on the equipment. Thus, he contends, since no tenancy had commenced prior to the acquisition of the lien he…
Authorities Cited
- Lovett v. Lee, 141 Fla. 395 (Fla. 1940)
- Pillans & Smith Co., Inc. v. Lowe, 117 Fla. 249 (Fla. 1934)
- G. M. C. A. Corp. v. Noni, Inc., 227 So. 2d 891 (Fla. 3d DCA 1969)
- W's. Drug Stores, Inc. v. Allen Inv. Co., 125 Fla. 823 (Fla. 1936)