Re: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
Glad to hear it! And glad to be able help!
Gioia
This e-mail transmission and any documents, files or previous e-mail
messages attached to it, are confidential and are protected by the
attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine. If you are not the
intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it to the
intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, disclosure,
copying, dissemination, distribution or use of any of the information
contained in, or attached to this e-mail transmission is STRICTLY
PROHIBITED. If you have received this transmission in error, please
immediately notify me by forwarding this e-mail to Info@dvllclegal.com, or
by telephone at (845) 321-0242 and then delete the message and its
attachments from your computer.
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org on behalf of Leonard Cabral
LensLaw@Lenslaw.com
Reply-To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
Date: Tuesday, July 28, 2015 at 10:56 AM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
Thank you for all you help. At the hearing on Plaintiff’s “Motion to
Re-Serve and Amend” the judge stated with my motion to dismiss for standing.
My motion was granted. Landlords cannot avoid the basic rule of standing J.
Leonard P. Cabral
Leonardcabral@lenslaw.com
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org
[mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Gioia DeCarlo
Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 11:06 AM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
Oops! Just realized I attached the wrong Glynn document that although
plaintiff must have standing at time of filing complaint, the affirmative
defense of no standing must be raised or it is waived. Here it is.
Gioia
This e-mail transmission and any documents, files or previous e-mail
messages attached to it, are confidential and are protected by the
attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine. If you are not the
intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it to the
intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, disclosure,
copying, dissemination, distribution or use of any of the information
contained in, or attached to this e-mail transmission is STRICTLY
PROHIBITED. If you have received this transmission in error, please
immediately notify me by forwarding this e-mail to Info@dvllclegal.com
mailto:Info@dvllclegal.com , or by telephone at (845) 321-0242 and then
delete the message and its attachments from your computer.
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org on behalf of Eddy Leal
el@leallegal.com
Reply-To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
Date: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 at 10:08 AM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
You might find the attached foreclosure case helpful in your search.
Citing to the Jeff-Ray and Progressive, Second District recognizes that
standing has to be met at the inception of the lawsuit. "The appellate
courts are nonetheless compelled to reverse based on the district courts'
application of a long line of supreme court cases applying the general
principle that “the plaintiff's lack of standing at the inception of the
case is not a defect that may be cured by the acquisition of standing after
the case is filed.” Attached is the case.
Eddy Leal
Eddy Leal, P.A.
201 South Biscayne Blvd, Suite 2650
Miami, FL 33131
Office: 305-914-0071
Fax: 305-901-2378
E-Mail: el@leallegal.com
On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 9:23 AM, Gioia DeCarlo gdc@dvllclegal.com wrote:
Standing must exist at time of the filing of the lawsuit. If not, the case
must be dismissed. Jeff-Ray case, Progressive case, attached. Lack of
standing at time of filing cannot be cured after the fact by substitution of
parites — one can’t transfer what one doesn’t have. Lack of standing,
however, is a raise-or-waive affirmative defense (see Glynn case attached).
Fl.R.Civ.Pro http://Fl.R.Civ.Pro 1.260 allows for substitution of parites
if the the interest is transferred from the original party to another by
order of court. One who lacks interest in the subject matter cannot
transfer the interest to another. The case must be dismissed and re-filed
by one who has standing.
Note there are numerous standing cases in the foreclosure context as banks
were filing all the time without standing.
Hope this helps.
Gioia
This e-mail transmission and any documents, files or previous e-mail
messages attached to it, are confidential and are protected by the
attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine. If you are not the
intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it to the
intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, disclosure,
copying, dissemination, distribution or use of any of the information
contained in, or attached to this e-mail transmission is STRICTLY
PROHIBITED. If you have received this transmission in error, please
immediately notify me by forwarding this e-mail to Info@dvllclegal.com
mailto:Info@dvllclegal.com , or by telephone at (845) 321-0242
tel:%28845%29%20321-0242 and then delete the message and its attachments
from your computer.
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org on behalf of Leonard Cabral
LensLaw@Lenslaw.com
Reply-To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
Date: Monday, July 20, 2015 at 11:40 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
Subject: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
Group:
83.60(1)(a) “The landlord must be given an opportunity to cure a deficiency
in a notice or in the pleadings before dismissal of the action.” A
complaint was filed by an Orlando attorney with the wrong landlord’s name.
(no standing). -He has now a motion to amend pursuant to 83.60 to change the
name of the plaintiff. Is standing a deficiency in the pleadings that can be
amended?Does anyone have the legislative intent they are willing to share?
Any ideas welcome.
Leonard P. Cabral, Esq.
212 North Park Ave.,
Sanford, FL 32771
(407)330-4998 tel:%28407%29330-4998
The information herein is legally privileged For Official Use Only and
protected under the Privacy Acto of 1974, as amended. Unauthorized
disclosure or misue of this Personal Information may result in criminal
and/or civil penalties." If you have received this e-mail message in error,
please reply to sender immediately with the statement "RECEIVED IN ERROR"and
destroy the original message.
_______________________________________________ landten mailing list
landten@lists.flabarrpptl.orghttp://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten
landten mailing list
landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten
_______________________________________________ landten mailing list
landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten
_______________________________________________ landten mailing list
landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten
The problem with tenant defense is when the client brings in the complaint and the time the law requires a response. That doesn’t leave much time for research that I can do but not it that timeframe. So I must rely on the great lawyers on this list who have this information at their finger tips. Thanks again. YOU MADE MY DAY.
If Harry reads this, you should be able to figure out why this should also make your day.
Leonard P. Cabral, Esq.
Leonardcabral@lenslaw.com
Please disregard inadvertent misspellings
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Gioia DeCarlo
Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2015 11:05 AM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
Glad to hear it! And glad to be able help!
Gioia
[cid:image001.png@01D0C93D.78FD0420]
This e-mail transmission and any documents, files or previous e-mail messages attached to it, are confidential and are protected by the attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine. If you are not the intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, disclosure, copying, dissemination, distribution or use of any of the information contained in, or attached to this e-mail transmission is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately notify me by forwarding this e-mail to Info@dvllclegal.commailto:Info@dvllclegal.com, or by telephone at (845) 321-0242 and then delete the message and its attachments from your computer.
From: <landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.orgmailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org> on behalf of Leonard Cabral <LensLaw@Lenslaw.commailto:LensLaw@Lenslaw.com>
Reply-To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee <landten@lists.flabarrpptl.orgmailto:landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org>
Date: Tuesday, July 28, 2015 at 10:56 AM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee <landten@lists.flabarrpptl.orgmailto:landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org>
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
Thank you for all you help. At the hearing on Plaintiff’s “Motion to Re-Serve and Amend” the judge stated with my motion to dismiss for standing. My motion was granted. Landlords cannot avoid the basic rule of standing ☺.
Leonard P. Cabral
Leonardcabral@lenslaw.commailto:Leonardcabral@lenslaw.com
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.orgmailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Gioia DeCarlo
Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 11:06 AM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
Oops! Just realized I attached the wrong Glynn document that although plaintiff must have standing at time of filing complaint, the affirmative defense of no standing must be raised or it is waived. Here it is.
Gioia
[cid:image001.png@01D0C93D.78FD0420]
This e-mail transmission and any documents, files or previous e-mail messages attached to it, are confidential and are protected by the attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine. If you are not the intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, disclosure, copying, dissemination, distribution or use of any of the information contained in, or attached to this e-mail transmission is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately notify me by forwarding this e-mail to Info@dvllclegal.commailto:Info@dvllclegal.com, or by telephone at (845) 321-0242 and then delete the message and its attachments from your computer.
From: <landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.orgmailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org> on behalf of Eddy Leal <el@leallegal.commailto:el@leallegal.com>
Reply-To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee <landten@lists.flabarrpptl.orgmailto:landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org>
Date: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 at 10:08 AM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee <landten@lists.flabarrpptl.orgmailto:landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org>
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
You might find the attached foreclosure case helpful in your search.
Citing to the Jeff-Ray and Progressive, Second District recognizes that standing has to be met at the inception of the lawsuit. "The appellate courts are nonetheless compelled to reverse based on the district courts' application of a long line of supreme court cases applying the general principle that “the plaintiff's lack of standing at the inception of the case is not a defect that may be cured by the acquisition of standing after the case is filed.” Attached is the case.
Eddy Leal
Eddy Leal, P.A.
201 South Biscayne Blvd, Suite 2650
Miami, FL 33131
Office: 305-914-0071
Fax: 305-901-2378
E-Mail: el@leallegal.commailto:el@leallegal.com
On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 9:23 AM, Gioia DeCarlo <gdc@dvllclegal.commailto:gdc@dvllclegal.com> wrote:
Standing must exist at time of the filing of the lawsuit. If not, the case must be dismissed. Jeff-Ray case, Progressive case, attached. Lack of standing at time of filing cannot be cured after the fact by substitution of parites — one can’t transfer what one doesn’t have. Lack of standing, however, is a raise-or-waive affirmative defense (see Glynn case attached).
Fl.R.Civ.Prohttp://Fl.R.Civ.Pro 1.260 allows for substitution of parites if the the interest is transferred from the original party to another by order of court. One who lacks interest in the subject matter cannot transfer the interest to another. The case must be dismissed and re-filed by one who has standing.
Note there are numerous standing cases in the foreclosure context as banks were filing all the time without standing.
Hope this helps.
Gioia
[cid:image001.png@01D0C93D.78FD0420]
This e-mail transmission and any documents, files or previous e-mail messages attached to it, are confidential and are protected by the attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine. If you are not the intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, disclosure, copying, dissemination, distribution or use of any of the information contained in, or attached to this e-mail transmission is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately notify me by forwarding this e-mail to Info@dvllclegal.commailto:Info@dvllclegal.com, or by telephone at (845) 321-0242tel:%28845%29%20321-0242 and then delete the message and its attachments from your computer.
From: <landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.orgmailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org> on behalf of Leonard Cabral <LensLaw@Lenslaw.commailto:LensLaw@Lenslaw.com>
Reply-To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee <landten@lists.flabarrpptl.orgmailto:landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org>
Date: Monday, July 20, 2015 at 11:40 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee <landten@lists.flabarrpptl.orgmailto:landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org>
Subject: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
Group:
83.60(1)(a) “The landlord must be given an opportunity to cure a deficiency in a notice or in the pleadings before dismissal of the action.” A complaint was filed by an Orlando attorney with the wrong landlord’s name. (no standing). -He has now a motion to amend pursuant to 83.60 to change the name of the plaintiff. Is standing a deficiency in the pleadings that can be amended?Does anyone have the legislative intent they are willing to share? Any ideas welcome.
Leonard P. Cabral, Esq.
212 North Park Ave.,
Sanford, FL 32771
Leonardcabral@lenslaw.commailto:Leonardcabral@lenslaw.com
(407)330-4998tel:%28407%29330-4998
The information herein is legally privileged For Official Use Only and protected under the Privacy Acto of 1974, as amended. Unauthorized disclosure or misue of this Personal Information may result in criminal and/or civil penalties." If you have received this e-mail message in error, please reply to sender immediately with the statement "RECEIVED IN ERROR"and destroy the original message.
_______________________________________________ landten mailing list landten@lists.flabarrpptl.orgmailto:landten@lists.flabarrpptl.orghttp://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten
landten mailing list
landten@lists.flabarrpptl.orgmailto:landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten
_______________________________________________ landten mailing list landten@lists.flabarrpptl.orgmailto:landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten
_______________________________________________ landten mailing list landten@lists.flabarrpptl.orgmailto:landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten
Hi Leonard
I hope you asked for legal fees!
If not, you have 30 days to file your motion for entitlement (under 83.48)
and to tax fees and costs under Fl R. Civ. Pro. 1.525.
This e-mail transmission and any documents, files or previous e-mail
messages attached to it, are confidential and are protected by the
attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine. If you are not the
intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it to the
intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, disclosure,
copying, dissemination, distribution or use of any of the information
contained in, or attached to this e-mail transmission is STRICTLY
PROHIBITED. If you have received this transmission in error, please
immediately notify me by forwarding this e-mail to Info@dvllclegal.com, or
by telephone at (845) 321-0242 and then delete the message and its
attachments from your computer.
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org on behalf of Leonard Cabral
LensLaw@Lenslaw.com
Reply-To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
Date: Tuesday, July 28, 2015 at 1:58 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
The problem with tenant defense is when the client brings in the complaint
and the time the law requires a response. That doesn’t leave much time for
research that I can do but not it that timeframe. So I must rely on the
great lawyers on this list who have this information at their finger tips.
Thanks again. YOU MADE MY DAY.
If Harry reads this, you should be able to figure out why this should also
make your day.
Leonard P. Cabral, Esq.
Leonardcabral@lenslaw.com
Please disregard inadvertent misspellings
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org
[mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Gioia DeCarlo
Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2015 11:05 AM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
Glad to hear it! And glad to be able help!
Gioia
This e-mail transmission and any documents, files or previous e-mail
messages attached to it, are confidential and are protected by the
attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine. If you are not the
intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it to the
intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, disclosure,
copying, dissemination, distribution or use of any of the information
contained in, or attached to this e-mail transmission is STRICTLY
PROHIBITED. If you have received this transmission in error, please
immediately notify me by forwarding this e-mail to Info@dvllclegal.com
mailto:Info@dvllclegal.com , or by telephone at (845) 321-0242 and then
delete the message and its attachments from your computer.
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org on behalf of Leonard Cabral
LensLaw@Lenslaw.com
Reply-To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
Date: Tuesday, July 28, 2015 at 10:56 AM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
Thank you for all you help. At the hearing on Plaintiff’s “Motion to
Re-Serve and Amend” the judge stated with my motion to dismiss for standing.
My motion was granted. Landlords cannot avoid the basic rule of standing J.
Leonard P. Cabral
Leonardcabral@lenslaw.com
From:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org
[mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Gioia DeCarlo
Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 11:06 AM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
Oops! Just realized I attached the wrong Glynn document that although
plaintiff must have standing at time of filing complaint, the affirmative
defense of no standing must be raised or it is waived. Here it is.
Gioia
This e-mail transmission and any documents, files or previous e-mail
messages attached to it, are confidential and are protected by the
attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine. If you are not the
intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it to the
intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, disclosure,
copying, dissemination, distribution or use of any of the information
contained in, or attached to this e-mail transmission is STRICTLY
PROHIBITED. If you have received this transmission in error, please
immediately notify me by forwarding this e-mail to Info@dvllclegal.com
mailto:Info@dvllclegal.com , or by telephone at (845) 321-0242 and then
delete the message and its attachments from your computer.
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org on behalf of Eddy Leal
el@leallegal.com
Reply-To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
Date: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 at 10:08 AM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
You might find the attached foreclosure case helpful in your search.
Citing to the Jeff-Ray and Progressive, Second District recognizes that
standing has to be met at the inception of the lawsuit. "The appellate
courts are nonetheless compelled to reverse based on the district courts'
application of a long line of supreme court cases applying the general
principle that “the plaintiff's lack of standing at the inception of the
case is not a defect that may be cured by the acquisition of standing after
the case is filed.” Attached is the case.
Eddy Leal
Eddy Leal, P.A.
201 South Biscayne Blvd, Suite 2650
Miami, FL 33131
Office: 305-914-0071
Fax: 305-901-2378
E-Mail: el@leallegal.com
On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 9:23 AM, Gioia DeCarlo gdc@dvllclegal.com wrote:
Standing must exist at time of the filing of the lawsuit. If not, the case
must be dismissed. Jeff-Ray case, Progressive case, attached. Lack of
standing at time of filing cannot be cured after the fact by substitution of
parites — one can’t transfer what one doesn’t have. Lack of standing,
however, is a raise-or-waive affirmative defense (see Glynn case attached).
Fl.R.Civ.Pro http://Fl.R.Civ.Pro 1.260 allows for substitution of parites
if the the interest is transferred from the original party to another by
order of court. One who lacks interest in the subject matter cannot
transfer the interest to another. The case must be dismissed and re-filed
by one who has standing.
Note there are numerous standing cases in the foreclosure context as banks
were filing all the time without standing.
Hope this helps.
Gioia
This e-mail transmission and any documents, files or previous e-mail
messages attached to it, are confidential and are protected by the
attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine. If you are not the
intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it to the
intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, disclosure,
copying, dissemination, distribution or use of any of the information
contained in, or attached to this e-mail transmission is STRICTLY
PROHIBITED. If you have received this transmission in error, please
immediately notify me by forwarding this e-mail to Info@dvllclegal.com
mailto:Info@dvllclegal.com , or by telephone at (845) 321-0242
tel:%28845%29%20321-0242 and then delete the message and its attachments
from your computer.
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org on behalf of Leonard Cabral
LensLaw@Lenslaw.com
Reply-To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
Date: Monday, July 20, 2015 at 11:40 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
Subject: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
Group:
83.60(1)(a) “The landlord must be given an opportunity to cure a deficiency
in a notice or in the pleadings before dismissal of the action.” A
complaint was filed by an Orlando attorney with the wrong landlord’s name.
(no standing). -He has now a motion to amend pursuant to 83.60 to change the
name of the plaintiff. Is standing a deficiency in the pleadings that can be
amended?Does anyone have the legislative intent they are willing to share?
Any ideas welcome.
Leonard P. Cabral, Esq.
212 North Park Ave.,
Sanford, FL 32771
(407)330-4998 tel:%28407%29330-4998
The information herein is legally privileged For Official Use Only and
protected under the Privacy Acto of 1974, as amended. Unauthorized
disclosure or misue of this Personal Information may result in criminal
and/or civil penalties." If you have received this e-mail message in error,
please reply to sender immediately with the statement "RECEIVED IN ERROR"and
destroy the original message.
_______________________________________________ landten mailing list
landten@lists.flabarrpptl.orghttp://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten
landten mailing list
landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten
_______________________________________________ landten mailing list
landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten
_______________________________________________ landten mailing list
landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten
_______________________________________________ landten mailing list
landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten
I actually had a question a bout that. Who do I ask for fees if the plaintiff is the wrong party, the attorney as sanctions?
I may be able to call the attorney and work out fees but I still filed a motion for costs and attorney fees.
Leonard P. Cabral
Leonardcabral@lenslaw.com
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Gioia DeCarlo
Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2015 2:51 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
Hi Leonard
I hope you asked for legal fees!
If not, you have 30 days to file your motion for entitlement (under 83.48) and to tax fees and costs under Fl R. Civ. Pro. 1.525.
[cid:image001.png@01D0CA4D.AD031FA0]
This e-mail transmission and any documents, files or previous e-mail messages attached to it, are confidential and are protected by the attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine. If you are not the intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, disclosure, copying, dissemination, distribution or use of any of the information contained in, or attached to this e-mail transmission is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately notify me by forwarding this e-mail to Info@dvllclegal.commailto:Info@dvllclegal.com, or by telephone at (845) 321-0242 and then delete the message and its attachments from your computer.
From: <landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.orgmailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org> on behalf of Leonard Cabral <LensLaw@Lenslaw.commailto:LensLaw@Lenslaw.com>
Reply-To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee <landten@lists.flabarrpptl.orgmailto:landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org>
Date: Tuesday, July 28, 2015 at 1:58 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee <landten@lists.flabarrpptl.orgmailto:landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org>
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
The problem with tenant defense is when the client brings in the complaint and the time the law requires a response. That doesn’t leave much time for research that I can do but not it that timeframe. So I must rely on the great lawyers on this list who have this information at their finger tips. Thanks again. YOU MADE MY DAY.
If Harry reads this, you should be able to figure out why this should also make your day.
Leonard P. Cabral, Esq.
Leonardcabral@lenslaw.commailto:Leonardcabral@lenslaw.com
Please disregard inadvertent misspellings
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.orgmailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Gioia DeCarlo
Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2015 11:05 AM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
Glad to hear it! And glad to be able help!
Gioia
[cid:image001.png@01D0CA4D.AD031FA0]
This e-mail transmission and any documents, files or previous e-mail messages attached to it, are confidential and are protected by the attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine. If you are not the intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, disclosure, copying, dissemination, distribution or use of any of the information contained in, or attached to this e-mail transmission is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately notify me by forwarding this e-mail to Info@dvllclegal.commailto:Info@dvllclegal.com, or by telephone at (845) 321-0242 and then delete the message and its attachments from your computer.
From: <landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.orgmailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org> on behalf of Leonard Cabral <LensLaw@Lenslaw.commailto:LensLaw@Lenslaw.com>
Reply-To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee <landten@lists.flabarrpptl.orgmailto:landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org>
Date: Tuesday, July 28, 2015 at 10:56 AM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee <landten@lists.flabarrpptl.orgmailto:landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org>
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
Thank you for all you help. At the hearing on Plaintiff’s “Motion to Re-Serve and Amend” the judge stated with my motion to dismiss for standing. My motion was granted. Landlords cannot avoid the basic rule of standing ☺.
Leonard P. Cabral
Leonardcabral@lenslaw.commailto:Leonardcabral@lenslaw.com
From:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.orgmailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Gioia DeCarlo
Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 11:06 AM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
Oops! Just realized I attached the wrong Glynn document that although plaintiff must have standing at time of filing complaint, the affirmative defense of no standing must be raised or it is waived. Here it is.
Gioia
[cid:image001.png@01D0CA4D.AD031FA0]
This e-mail transmission and any documents, files or previous e-mail messages attached to it, are confidential and are protected by the attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine. If you are not the intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, disclosure, copying, dissemination, distribution or use of any of the information contained in, or attached to this e-mail transmission is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately notify me by forwarding this e-mail to Info@dvllclegal.commailto:Info@dvllclegal.com, or by telephone at (845) 321-0242 and then delete the message and its attachments from your computer.
From: <landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.orgmailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org> on behalf of Eddy Leal <el@leallegal.commailto:el@leallegal.com>
Reply-To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee <landten@lists.flabarrpptl.orgmailto:landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org>
Date: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 at 10:08 AM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee <landten@lists.flabarrpptl.orgmailto:landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org>
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
You might find the attached foreclosure case helpful in your search.
Citing to the Jeff-Ray and Progressive, Second District recognizes that standing has to be met at the inception of the lawsuit. "The appellate courts are nonetheless compelled to reverse based on the district courts' application of a long line of supreme court cases applying the general principle that “the plaintiff's lack of standing at the inception of the case is not a defect that may be cured by the acquisition of standing after the case is filed.” Attached is the case.
Eddy Leal
Eddy Leal, P.A.
201 South Biscayne Blvd, Suite 2650
Miami, FL 33131
Office: 305-914-0071
Fax: 305-901-2378
E-Mail: el@leallegal.commailto:el@leallegal.com
On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 9:23 AM, Gioia DeCarlo <gdc@dvllclegal.commailto:gdc@dvllclegal.com> wrote:
Standing must exist at time of the filing of the lawsuit. If not, the case must be dismissed. Jeff-Ray case, Progressive case, attached. Lack of standing at time of filing cannot be cured after the fact by substitution of parites — one can’t transfer what one doesn’t have. Lack of standing, however, is a raise-or-waive affirmative defense (see Glynn case attached).
Fl.R.Civ.Prohttp://Fl.R.Civ.Pro 1.260 allows for substitution of parites if the the interest is transferred from the original party to another by order of court. One who lacks interest in the subject matter cannot transfer the interest to another. The case must be dismissed and re-filed by one who has standing.
Note there are numerous standing cases in the foreclosure context as banks were filing all the time without standing.
Hope this helps.
Gioia
[cid:image001.png@01D0CA4D.AD031FA0]
This e-mail transmission and any documents, files or previous e-mail messages attached to it, are confidential and are protected by the attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine. If you are not the intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, disclosure, copying, dissemination, distribution or use of any of the information contained in, or attached to this e-mail transmission is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately notify me by forwarding this e-mail to Info@dvllclegal.commailto:Info@dvllclegal.com, or by telephone at (845) 321-0242tel:%28845%29%20321-0242 and then delete the message and its attachments from your computer.
From: <landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.orgmailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org> on behalf of Leonard Cabral <LensLaw@Lenslaw.commailto:LensLaw@Lenslaw.com>
Reply-To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee <landten@lists.flabarrpptl.orgmailto:landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org>
Date: Monday, July 20, 2015 at 11:40 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee <landten@lists.flabarrpptl.orgmailto:landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org>
Subject: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
Group:
83.60(1)(a) “The landlord must be given an opportunity to cure a deficiency in a notice or in the pleadings before dismissal of the action.” A complaint was filed by an Orlando attorney with the wrong landlord’s name. (no standing). -He has now a motion to amend pursuant to 83.60 to change the name of the plaintiff. Is standing a deficiency in the pleadings that can be amended?Does anyone have the legislative intent they are willing to share? Any ideas welcome.
Leonard P. Cabral, Esq.
212 North Park Ave.,
Sanford, FL 32771
Leonardcabral@lenslaw.commailto:Leonardcabral@lenslaw.com
(407)330-4998tel:%28407%29330-4998
The information herein is legally privileged For Official Use Only and protected under the Privacy Acto of 1974, as amended. Unauthorized disclosure or misue of this Personal Information may result in criminal and/or civil penalties." If you have received this e-mail message in error, please reply to sender immediately with the statement "RECEIVED IN ERROR"and destroy the original message.
_______________________________________________ landten mailing list landten@lists.flabarrpptl.orgmailto:landten@lists.flabarrpptl.orghttp://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten
landten mailing list
landten@lists.flabarrpptl.orgmailto:landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten
_______________________________________________ landten mailing list landten@lists.flabarrpptl.orgmailto:landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten
_______________________________________________ landten mailing list landten@lists.flabarrpptl.orgmailto:landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten
_______________________________________________ landten mailing list landten@lists.flabarrpptl.orgmailto:landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten
The plaintiff’s case was dismissed. The judgment goes against the plaintiff
(fair result, the plaintiff is the party that caused the unnecceary legal
fees for your client).
Now, it may be the attorney filed with the wrong plaintiff in error or on
the attorney’s advice, the case was brought by the wrong party and if so,
maybe the attorney will step up and do the right thing and pay, but that’s
between the plaintiff’s attorney and the plaintiff. The lawyer has no
direct liability to your client of which I am aware.
Unless you get an agreement and the money right way, file your Motion to
Determine Enititlement and To Tax Fees & Costs because you only have 30 days
and the filing of it will likely make the other side realize they have to
pay (you did prevail)— include your time for any research and drafting the
motion and ask for the time that will be spent at hearing the motion. I
doubt the fees will be so much that they will insist on a fee hearing to
determine a reasonable fee amount (I am confident you will win on
entitlement). I have never had to go that far — the times my client was
entitled, the other side paid. But if you do go to a fee hearing, my
understanding is that the plaintiff will then have to pay your time to
prepare & attend the fee hearing and for your expert’s review of file and
attendance at the fee hearing, all which make the fee hearing impractical
for the plaintiff — even attending the hearing on your motion to detemine
and tax is crazy for them to go. They will pay.
Gioia
Gdc@dvllclegal.com
This e-mail transmission and any documents, files or previous e-mail
messages attached to it, are confidential and are protected by the
attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine. If you are not the
intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it to the
intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, disclosure,
copying, dissemination, distribution or use of any of the information
contained in, or attached to this e-mail transmission is STRICTLY
PROHIBITED. If you have received this transmission in error, please
immediately notify me by forwarding this e-mail to Info@dvllclegal.com, or
by telephone at (845) 321-0242 and then delete the message and its
attachments from your computer.
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org on behalf of Leonard Cabral
LensLaw@Lenslaw.com
Reply-To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
Date: Wednesday, July 29, 2015 at 10:37 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
I actually had a question a bout that. Who do I ask for fees if the
plaintiff is the wrong party, the attorney as sanctions?
I may be able to call the attorney and work out fees but I still filed a
motion for costs and attorney fees.
Leonard P. Cabral
Leonardcabral@lenslaw.com
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org
[mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Gioia DeCarlo
Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2015 2:51 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
Hi Leonard
I hope you asked for legal fees!
If not, you have 30 days to file your motion for entitlement (under 83.48)
and to tax fees and costs under Fl R. Civ. Pro. 1.525.
This e-mail transmission and any documents, files or previous e-mail
messages attached to it, are confidential and are protected by the
attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine. If you are not the
intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it to the
intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, disclosure,
copying, dissemination, distribution or use of any of the information
contained in, or attached to this e-mail transmission is STRICTLY
PROHIBITED. If you have received this transmission in error, please
immediately notify me by forwarding this e-mail to Info@dvllclegal.com
mailto:Info@dvllclegal.com , or by telephone at (845) 321-0242 and then
delete the message and its attachments from your computer.
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org on behalf of Leonard Cabral
LensLaw@Lenslaw.com
Reply-To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
Date: Tuesday, July 28, 2015 at 1:58 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
The problem with tenant defense is when the client brings in the complaint
and the time the law requires a response. That doesn’t leave much time for
research that I can do but not it that timeframe. So I must rely on the
great lawyers on this list who have this information at their finger tips.
Thanks again. YOU MADE MY DAY.
If Harry reads this, you should be able to figure out why this should also
make your day.
Leonard P. Cabral, Esq.
Leonardcabral@lenslaw.com
Please disregard inadvertent misspellings
From:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org
[mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Gioia DeCarlo
Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2015 11:05 AM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
Glad to hear it! And glad to be able help!
Gioia
This e-mail transmission and any documents, files or previous e-mail
messages attached to it, are confidential and are protected by the
attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine. If you are not the
intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it to the
intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, disclosure,
copying, dissemination, distribution or use of any of the information
contained in, or attached to this e-mail transmission is STRICTLY
PROHIBITED. If you have received this transmission in error, please
immediately notify me by forwarding this e-mail to Info@dvllclegal.com
mailto:Info@dvllclegal.com , or by telephone at (845) 321-0242 and then
delete the message and its attachments from your computer.
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org on behalf of Leonard Cabral
LensLaw@Lenslaw.com
Reply-To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
Date: Tuesday, July 28, 2015 at 10:56 AM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
Thank you for all you help. At the hearing on Plaintiff’s “Motion to
Re-Serve and Amend” the judge stated with my motion to dismiss for standing.
My motion was granted. Landlords cannot avoid the basic rule of standing J.
Leonard P. Cabral
Leonardcabral@lenslaw.com
From:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org
[mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Gioia DeCarlo
Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 11:06 AM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
Oops! Just realized I attached the wrong Glynn document that although
plaintiff must have standing at time of filing complaint, the affirmative
defense of no standing must be raised or it is waived. Here it is.
Gioia
This e-mail transmission and any documents, files or previous e-mail
messages attached to it, are confidential and are protected by the
attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine. If you are not the
intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it to the
intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, disclosure,
copying, dissemination, distribution or use of any of the information
contained in, or attached to this e-mail transmission is STRICTLY
PROHIBITED. If you have received this transmission in error, please
immediately notify me by forwarding this e-mail to Info@dvllclegal.com
mailto:Info@dvllclegal.com , or by telephone at (845) 321-0242 and then
delete the message and its attachments from your computer.
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org on behalf of Eddy Leal
el@leallegal.com
Reply-To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
Date: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 at 10:08 AM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
You might find the attached foreclosure case helpful in your search.
Citing to the Jeff-Ray and Progressive, Second District recognizes that
standing has to be met at the inception of the lawsuit. "The appellate
courts are nonetheless compelled to reverse based on the district courts'
application of a long line of supreme court cases applying the general
principle that “the plaintiff's lack of standing at the inception of the
case is not a defect that may be cured by the acquisition of standing after
the case is filed.” Attached is the case.
Eddy Leal
Eddy Leal, P.A.
201 South Biscayne Blvd, Suite 2650
Miami, FL 33131
Office: 305-914-0071
Fax: 305-901-2378
E-Mail: el@leallegal.com
On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 9:23 AM, Gioia DeCarlo gdc@dvllclegal.com wrote:
Standing must exist at time of the filing of the lawsuit. If not, the case
must be dismissed. Jeff-Ray case, Progressive case, attached. Lack of
standing at time of filing cannot be cured after the fact by substitution of
parites — one can’t transfer what one doesn’t have. Lack of standing,
however, is a raise-or-waive affirmative defense (see Glynn case attached).
Fl.R.Civ.Pro http://Fl.R.Civ.Pro 1.260 allows for substitution of parites
if the the interest is transferred from the original party to another by
order of court. One who lacks interest in the subject matter cannot
transfer the interest to another. The case must be dismissed and re-filed
by one who has standing.
Note there are numerous standing cases in the foreclosure context as banks
were filing all the time without standing.
Hope this helps.
Gioia
This e-mail transmission and any documents, files or previous e-mail
messages attached to it, are confidential and are protected by the
attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine. If you are not the
intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it to the
intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, disclosure,
copying, dissemination, distribution or use of any of the information
contained in, or attached to this e-mail transmission is STRICTLY
PROHIBITED. If you have received this transmission in error, please
immediately notify me by forwarding this e-mail to Info@dvllclegal.com
mailto:Info@dvllclegal.com , or by telephone at (845) 321-0242
tel:%28845%29%20321-0242 and then delete the message and its attachments
from your computer.
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org on behalf of Leonard Cabral
LensLaw@Lenslaw.com
Reply-To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
Date: Monday, July 20, 2015 at 11:40 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
Subject: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
Group:
83.60(1)(a) “The landlord must be given an opportunity to cure a deficiency
in a notice or in the pleadings before dismissal of the action.” A
complaint was filed by an Orlando attorney with the wrong landlord’s name.
(no standing). -He has now a motion to amend pursuant to 83.60 to change the
name of the plaintiff. Is standing a deficiency in the pleadings that can be
amended?Does anyone have the legislative intent they are willing to share?
Any ideas welcome.
Leonard P. Cabral, Esq.
212 North Park Ave.,
Sanford, FL 32771
(407)330-4998 tel:%28407%29330-4998
The information herein is legally privileged For Official Use Only and
protected under the Privacy Acto of 1974, as amended. Unauthorized
disclosure or misue of this Personal Information may result in criminal
and/or civil penalties." If you have received this e-mail message in error,
please reply to sender immediately with the statement "RECEIVED IN ERROR"and
destroy the original message.
_______________________________________________ landten mailing list
landten@lists.flabarrpptl.orghttp://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten
landten mailing list
landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten
_______________________________________________ landten mailing list
landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten
_______________________________________________ landten mailing list
landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten
_______________________________________________ landten mailing list
landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten
_______________________________________________ landten mailing list
landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten
My understanding is that you are not allowed to collect attorney's fees on
you Motion for Attorney's Fees. In other words, you cannot get fees on
fees.
Sebastian Jaramillo, Esq.
66 W. Flagler St Suite 500 Miami, FL 33130
Tel: (305) 600-3805 Fax: (786) 347-5562
www.lawjb.com
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended
solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed.
If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager.
This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the
individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not
disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender
immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and
delete this e-mail from your system. If you are not the intended recipient
you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any
action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly
prohibited.
IMPORTANT TAX NOTICE: This communication is not written to be used, and
cannot be used, by a taxpayer for the purpose of avoiding penalties that
may be asserted against the taxpayer under the Internal Revenue Code of
1986, as amended.
On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 7:28 AM, Gioia DeCarlo gdc@dvllclegal.com wrote:
The plaintiff’s case was dismissed. The judgment goes against the
plaintiff (fair result, the plaintiff is the party that caused the
unnecceary legal fees for your client).
Now, it may be the attorney filed with the wrong plaintiff in error or on
the attorney’s advice, the case was brought by the wrong party and if so,
maybe the attorney will step up and do the right thing and pay, but that’s
between the plaintiff’s attorney and the plaintiff. The lawyer has no
direct liability to your client of which I am aware.
Unless you get an agreement and the money right way, file your Motion to
Determine Enititlement and To Tax Fees & Costs because you only have 30
days and the filing of it will likely make the other side realize they have
to pay (you did prevail)— include your time for any research and drafting
the motion and ask for the time that will be spent at hearing the motion.
I doubt the fees will be so much that they will insist on a fee hearing to
determine a reasonable fee amount (I am confident you will win on
entitlement). I have never had to go that far — the times my client was
entitled, the other side paid. But if you do go to a fee hearing, my
understanding is that the plaintiff will then have to pay your time to
prepare & attend the fee hearing and for your expert’s review of file and
attendance at the fee hearing, all which make the fee hearing impractical
for the plaintiff — even attending the hearing on your motion to detemine
and tax is crazy for them to go. They will pay.
Gioia
Gdc@dvllclegal.com
This e-mail transmission and any documents, files or previous e-mail
messages attached to it, are confidential and are protected by the
attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine. If you are not the
intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it to the
intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, disclosure,
copying, dissemination, distribution or use of any of the information
contained in, or attached to this e-mail transmission is STRICTLY
PROHIBITED. If you have received this transmission in error, please
immediately notify me by forwarding this e-mail to Info@dvllclegal.com,
or by telephone at (845) 321-0242 and then delete the message and its
attachments from your computer.
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org on behalf of Leonard Cabral
LensLaw@Lenslaw.com
Reply-To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
Date: Wednesday, July 29, 2015 at 10:37 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
I actually had a question a bout that. Who do I ask for fees if the
plaintiff is the wrong party, the attorney as sanctions?
I may be able to call the attorney and work out fees but I still filed a
motion for costs and attorney fees.
Leonard P. Cabral
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [
mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org
landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] *On Behalf Of *Gioia DeCarlo
Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2015 2:51 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
Hi Leonard
I hope you asked for legal fees!
If not, you have 30 days to file your motion for entitlement (under 83.48)
and to tax fees and costs under Fl R. Civ. Pro. 1.525.
This e-mail transmission and any documents, files or previous e-mail
messages attached to it, are confidential and are protected by the
attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine. If you are not the
intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it to the
intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, disclosure,
copying, dissemination, distribution or use of any of the information
contained in, or attached to this e-mail transmission is STRICTLY
PROHIBITED. If you have received this transmission in error, please
immediately notify me by forwarding this e-mail to Info@dvllclegal.com,
or by telephone at (845) 321-0242 and then delete the message and its
attachments from your computer.
*From: *landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org on behalf of Leonard
Cabral LensLaw@Lenslaw.com
*Reply-To: *RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee <landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
*Date: *Tuesday, July 28, 2015 at 1:58 PM
*To: *RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
*Subject: *Re: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
The problem with tenant defense is when the client brings in the complaint
and the time the law requires a response. That doesn’t leave much time for
research that I can do but not it that timeframe. So I must rely on the
great lawyers on this list who have this information at their finger tips.
Thanks again. YOU MADE MY DAY.
If Harry reads this, you should be able to figure out why this should also
make your day.
Leonard P. Cabral, Esq.
Please disregard inadvertent misspellings
*From:*landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [
mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org
landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] *On Behalf Of *Gioia DeCarlo
Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2015 11:05 AM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
Glad to hear it! And glad to be able help!
Gioia
This e-mail transmission and any documents, files or previous e-mail
messages attached to it, are confidential and are protected by the
attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine. If you are not the
intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it to the
intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, disclosure,
copying, dissemination, distribution or use of any of the information
contained in, or attached to this e-mail transmission is STRICTLY
PROHIBITED. If you have received this transmission in error, please
immediately notify me by forwarding this e-mail to Info@dvllclegal.com,
or by telephone at (845) 321-0242 and then delete the message and its
attachments from your computer.
*From: *landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org on behalf of Leonard
Cabral LensLaw@Lenslaw.com
*Reply-To: *RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee <landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
*Date: *Tuesday, July 28, 2015 at 10:56 AM
*To: *RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
*Subject: *Re: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
Thank you for all you help. At the hearing on Plaintiff’s “Motion to
Re-Serve and Amend” the judge stated with my motion to dismiss for
standing. My motion was granted. Landlords cannot avoid the basic rule of
standing J.
Leonard P. Cabral
*From:*landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [
mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org
landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] *On Behalf Of *Gioia DeCarlo
Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 11:06 AM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
Oops! Just realized I attached the wrong Glynn document that although
plaintiff must have standing at time of filing complaint, the affirmative
defense of no standing must be raised or it is waived. Here it is.
Gioia
This e-mail transmission and any documents, files or previous e-mail
messages attached to it, are confidential and are protected by the
attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine. If you are not the
intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it to the
intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, disclosure,
copying, dissemination, distribution or use of any of the information
contained in, or attached to this e-mail transmission is STRICTLY
PROHIBITED. If you have received this transmission in error, please
immediately notify me by forwarding this e-mail to Info@dvllclegal.com,
or by telephone at (845) 321-0242 and then delete the message and its
attachments from your computer.
*From: *landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org on behalf of Eddy Leal <
el@leallegal.com>
*Reply-To: *RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee <landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
*Date: *Tuesday, July 21, 2015 at 10:08 AM
*To: *RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
*Subject: *Re: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
You might find the attached foreclosure case helpful in your search.
Citing to the *Jeff-Ray *and Progressive, Second District recognizes
that standing has to be met at the inception of the lawsuit. "The
appellate courts are nonetheless compelled to reverse based on the district
courts' application of a long line of supreme court cases applying the
general principle that “the plaintiff's lack of standing at the inception
of the case is not a defect that may be cured by the acquisition of
standing after the case is filed.” Attached is the case.
Eddy Leal
Eddy Leal, P.A.
201 South Biscayne Blvd, Suite 2650
Miami, FL 33131
Office: 305-914-0071
Fax: 305-901-2378
E-Mail: el@leallegal.com
On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 9:23 AM, Gioia DeCarlo gdc@dvllclegal.com wrote:
Standing must exist at time of the filing of the lawsuit. If not, the
case must be dismissed. Jeff-Ray case, Progressive case, attached. Lack
of standing at time of filing cannot be cured after the fact by
substitution of parites — one can’t transfer what one doesn’t have. Lack
of standing, however, is a raise-or-waive affirmative defense (see Glynn
case attached).
Fl.R.Civ.Pro 1.260 allows for substitution of parites if the the interest
is transferred from the original party to another by order of court. One
who lacks interest in the subject matter cannot transfer the interest to
another. The case must be dismissed and re-filed by one who has standing.
Note there are numerous standing cases in the foreclosure context as banks
were filing all the time without standing.
Hope this helps.
Gioia
This e-mail transmission and any documents, files or previous e-mail
messages attached to it, are confidential and are protected by the
attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine. If you are not the
intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it to the
intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, disclosure,
copying, dissemination, distribution or use of any of the information
contained in, or attached to this e-mail transmission is STRICTLY
PROHIBITED. If you have received this transmission in error, please
immediately notify me by forwarding this e-mail to Info@dvllclegal.com,
or by telephone at (845) 321-0242 and then delete the message and its
attachments from your computer.
*From: *landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org on behalf of Leonard
Cabral LensLaw@Lenslaw.com
*Reply-To: *RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee <landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
*Date: *Monday, July 20, 2015 at 11:40 PM
*To: *RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
*Subject: *[RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
Group:
83.60(1)(a) “The landlord must be given an opportunity to cure a
deficiency in a notice or in the pleadings before dismissal of the
action.” A complaint was filed by an Orlando attorney with the wrong
landlord’s name. (no standing). -He has now a motion to amend pursuant to
83.60 to change the name of the plaintiff. Is standing a deficiency in the
pleadings that can be amended?Does anyone have the legislative intent they
are willing to share? Any ideas welcome.
Leonard P. Cabral, Esq.
212 North Park Ave.,
Sanford, FL 32771
(407)330-4998
The information herein is legally privileged For Official Use Only and
protected under the Privacy Acto of 1974, as amended. Unauthorized
disclosure or misue of this Personal Information may result in criminal
and/or civil penalties." If you have received this e-mail message in
error, please reply to sender immediately with the statement "RECEIVED IN
ERROR"and destroy the original message.
_______________________________________________ landten mailing list
landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten
landten mailing list
landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten
_______________________________________________ landten mailing list
landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten
_______________________________________________ landten mailing list
landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten
_______________________________________________ landten mailing list
landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten
_______________________________________________ landten mailing list
landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten
landten mailing list
landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten
Unless there is a provision in the Lease which states that it includes fees/costs relating to the determination of said fees/costs….had a judge bring that to my attention once, and now I include it in every document where attorneys’ fees could be recovered.
Les H. Stevens, Esquire
Les H. Stevens, P.A.
5301 North Federal Highway
Suite 130
Boca Raton, Florida 33487
Tel. - (561) 989-9797
Fax - (561) 989-8484
E-Mail - lesstevens@earthlink.net
OUR OFFICE NO LONGER ACCEPTS CASHIER'S OR BANK CHECKS AT CLOSING. ALL FUNDS MUST BE RECEIVED IN THE FORM OF A SAME DAY WIRE TRANSFER ONLY (NO ACH TRANSFERS).
THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE INDIVIDUAL OR ENTITY TO WHOM IT IS ADDRESSED, AND MAY CONTAIN INFORMATION THAT IS PRIVILEGED, CONFIDENTIAL AND/OR OTHERWISE EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS TRANSMITTAL IN ERROR, PLEASE DELETE IT AND NOTIFY THIS OFFICE IMMEDIATELY
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Sebastian Jaramillo
Sent: Thursday, July 30, 2015 8:24 AM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
My understanding is that you are not allowed to collect attorney's fees on you Motion for Attorney's Fees. In other words, you cannot get fees on fees.
Sebastian Jaramillo, Esq.
http://lawjb.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/logo-jb.png
66 W. Flagler St Suite 500 Miami, FL 33130
Tel: (305) 600-3805 Fax: (786) 347-5562
www.lawjb.com
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited.
IMPORTANT TAX NOTICE: This communication is not written to be used, and cannot be used, by a taxpayer for the purpose of avoiding penalties that may be asserted against the taxpayer under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended.
On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 7:28 AM, Gioia DeCarlo gdc@dvllclegal.com wrote:
The plaintiff’s case was dismissed. The judgment goes against the plaintiff (fair result, the plaintiff is the party that caused the unnecceary legal fees for your client).
Now, it may be the attorney filed with the wrong plaintiff in error or on the attorney’s advice, the case was brought by the wrong party and if so, maybe the attorney will step up and do the right thing and pay, but that’s between the plaintiff’s attorney and the plaintiff. The lawyer has no direct liability to your client of which I am aware.
Unless you get an agreement and the money right way, file your Motion to Determine Enititlement and To Tax Fees & Costs because you only have 30 days and the filing of it will likely make the other side realize they have to pay (you did prevail)— include your time for any research and drafting the motion and ask for the time that will be spent at hearing the motion. I doubt the fees will be so much that they will insist on a fee hearing to determine a reasonable fee amount (I am confident you will win on entitlement). I have never had to go that far — the times my client was entitled, the other side paid. But if you do go to a fee hearing, my understanding is that the plaintiff will then have to pay your time to prepare & attend the fee hearing and for your expert’s review of file and attendance at the fee hearing, all which make the fee hearing impractical for the plaintiff — even attending the hearing on your motion to detemine and tax is crazy for them to go. They will pay.
Gioia
This e-mail transmission and any documents, files or previous e-mail messages attached to it, are confidential and are protected by the attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine. If you are not the intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, disclosure, copying, dissemination, distribution or use of any of the information contained in, or attached to this e-mail transmission is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately notify me by forwarding this e-mail to mailto:Info@dvllclegal.com Info@dvllclegal.com, or by telephone at (845) 321-0242 tel:%28845%29%20321-0242 and then delete the message and its attachments from your computer.
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org on behalf of Leonard Cabral LensLaw@Lenslaw.com
Reply-To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
Date: Wednesday, July 29, 2015 at 10:37 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
I actually had a question a bout that. Who do I ask for fees if the plaintiff is the wrong party, the attorney as sanctions?
I may be able to call the attorney and work out fees but I still filed a motion for costs and attorney fees.
Leonard P. Cabral
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Gioia DeCarlo
Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2015 2:51 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
Hi Leonard
I hope you asked for legal fees!
If not, you have 30 days to file your motion for entitlement (under 83.48) and to tax fees and costs under Fl R. Civ. Pro. 1.525.
This e-mail transmission and any documents, files or previous e-mail messages attached to it, are confidential and are protected by the attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine. If you are not the intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, disclosure, copying, dissemination, distribution or use of any of the information contained in, or attached to this e-mail transmission is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately notify me by forwarding this e-mail to mailto:Info@dvllclegal.com Info@dvllclegal.com, or by telephone at (845) 321-0242 tel:%28845%29%20321-0242 and then delete the message and its attachments from your computer.
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org on behalf of Leonard Cabral LensLaw@Lenslaw.com
Reply-To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
Date: Tuesday, July 28, 2015 at 1:58 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
The problem with tenant defense is when the client brings in the complaint and the time the law requires a response. That doesn’t leave much time for research that I can do but not it that timeframe. So I must rely on the great lawyers on this list who have this information at their finger tips. Thanks again. YOU MADE MY DAY.
If Harry reads this, you should be able to figure out why this should also make your day.
Leonard P. Cabral, Esq.
Please disregard inadvertent misspellings
From:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Gioia DeCarlo
Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2015 11:05 AM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
Glad to hear it! And glad to be able help!
Gioia
This e-mail transmission and any documents, files or previous e-mail messages attached to it, are confidential and are protected by the attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine. If you are not the intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, disclosure, copying, dissemination, distribution or use of any of the information contained in, or attached to this e-mail transmission is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately notify me by forwarding this e-mail to mailto:Info@dvllclegal.com Info@dvllclegal.com, or by telephone at (845) 321-0242 tel:%28845%29%20321-0242 and then delete the message and its attachments from your computer.
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org on behalf of Leonard Cabral LensLaw@Lenslaw.com
Reply-To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
Date: Tuesday, July 28, 2015 at 10:56 AM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
Thank you for all you help. At the hearing on Plaintiff’s “Motion to Re-Serve and Amend” the judge stated with my motion to dismiss for standing. My motion was granted. Landlords cannot avoid the basic rule of standing J.
Leonard P. Cabral
From:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Gioia DeCarlo
Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 11:06 AM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
Oops! Just realized I attached the wrong Glynn document that although plaintiff must have standing at time of filing complaint, the affirmative defense of no standing must be raised or it is waived. Here it is.
Gioia
This e-mail transmission and any documents, files or previous e-mail messages attached to it, are confidential and are protected by the attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine. If you are not the intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, disclosure, copying, dissemination, distribution or use of any of the information contained in, or attached to this e-mail transmission is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately notify me by forwarding this e-mail to mailto:Info@dvllclegal.com Info@dvllclegal.com, or by telephone at (845) 321-0242 tel:%28845%29%20321-0242 and then delete the message and its attachments from your computer.
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org on behalf of Eddy Leal el@leallegal.com
Reply-To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
Date: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 at 10:08 AM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
You might find the attached foreclosure case helpful in your search.
Citing to the Jeff-Ray and Progressive, Second District recognizes that standing has to be met at the inception of the lawsuit. "The appellate courts are nonetheless compelled to reverse based on the district courts' application of a long line of supreme court cases applying the general principle that “the plaintiff's lack of standing at the inception of the case is not a defect that may be cured by the acquisition of standing after the case is filed.” Attached is the case.
Eddy Leal
Eddy Leal, P.A.
201 South Biscayne Blvd, Suite 2650
Miami, FL 33131
Office: 305-914-0071
Fax: 305-901-2378
E-Mail: el@leallegal.com
On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 9:23 AM, Gioia DeCarlo gdc@dvllclegal.com wrote:
Standing must exist at time of the filing of the lawsuit. If not, the case must be dismissed. Jeff-Ray case, Progressive case, attached. Lack of standing at time of filing cannot be cured after the fact by substitution of parites — one can’t transfer what one doesn’t have. Lack of standing, however, is a raise-or-waive affirmative defense (see Glynn case attached).
Fl.R.Civ.Pro 1.260 allows for substitution of parites if the the interest is transferred from the original party to another by order of court. One who lacks interest in the subject matter cannot transfer the interest to another. The case must be dismissed and re-filed by one who has standing.
Note there are numerous standing cases in the foreclosure context as banks were filing all the time without standing.
Hope this helps.
Gioia
This e-mail transmission and any documents, files or previous e-mail messages attached to it, are confidential and are protected by the attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine. If you are not the intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, disclosure, copying, dissemination, distribution or use of any of the information contained in, or attached to this e-mail transmission is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately notify me by forwarding this e-mail to mailto:Info@dvllclegal.com Info@dvllclegal.com, or by telephone at (845) 321-0242 tel:%28845%29%20321-0242 and then delete the message and its attachments from your computer.
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org on behalf of Leonard Cabral LensLaw@Lenslaw.com
Reply-To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
Date: Monday, July 20, 2015 at 11:40 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
Subject: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
Group:
83.60(1)(a) “The landlord must be given an opportunity to cure a deficiency in a notice or in the pleadings before dismissal of the action.” A complaint was filed by an Orlando attorney with the wrong landlord’s name. (no standing). -He has now a motion to amend pursuant to 83.60 to change the name of the plaintiff. Is standing a deficiency in the pleadings that can be amended?Does anyone have the legislative intent they are willing to share? Any ideas welcome.
Leonard P. Cabral, Esq.
212 North Park Ave.,
Sanford, FL 32771
(407)330-4998 tel:%28407%29330-4998
The information herein is legally privileged For Official Use Only and protected under the Privacy Acto of 1974, as amended. Unauthorized disclosure or misue of this Personal Information may result in criminal and/or civil penalties." If you have received this e-mail message in error, please reply to sender immediately with the statement "RECEIVED IN ERROR"and destroy the original message.
_______________________________________________ landten mailing list landten@lists.flabarrpptl.orghttp://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten
landten mailing list
landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten
_______________________________________________ landten mailing list landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten
_______________________________________________ landten mailing list landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten
_______________________________________________ landten mailing list landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten
_______________________________________________ landten mailing list landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten
landten mailing list
landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten
Les is correct; that is the Waverly Condominium case out of the Fourth DCA
[cid:imaged9ab9a.GIF@386bc664.41824f2c]
Manuel Farach / Of Counsel - Board Certified in Real Estate Law and Business Litigation by The Florida Bar
Richman Greer P.A.
One Clearlake Centre
Suite 1504
250 Australian Avenue South
West Palm Beach, Florida 33401
Office: 561.803.3500
Fax: 561.820.1608
Direct: 561.803.3501
Email: MFarach@richmangreer.com
V-cardhttp://richmangreer.com/uploads/vcards/VcardFarach.vcf
www.RichmanGreer.comhttp://www.RichmanGreer.com
U.S. Treasury Regulation Circular 230 requires us to advise you that written communications issued by us are not intended to be and cannot be relied upon to avoid penalties that may be imposed by the Internal Revenue Service.
Incoming emails are filtered which may delay receipt. This email is personal to the named recipient(s) and may be privileged and confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, you received this in error. If so, any review, dissemination, or copying of this email is prohibited. Please immediately notify us by email and delete the original message.
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of lesstevens
Sent: Thursday, July 30, 2015 8:34 AM
To: 'RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee'
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
Unless there is a provision in the Lease which states that it includes fees/costs relating to the determination of said fees/costs….had a judge bring that to my attention once, and now I include it in every document where attorneys’ fees could be recovered.
Les H. Stevens, Esquire
Les H. Stevens, P.A.
5301 North Federal Highway
Suite 130
Boca Raton, Florida 33487
Tel. - (561) 989-9797
Fax - (561) 989-8484
E-Mail - lesstevens@earthlink.net
OUR OFFICE NO LONGER ACCEPTS CASHIER'S OR BANK CHECKS AT CLOSING. ALL FUNDS MUST BE RECEIVED IN THE FORM OF A SAME DAY WIRE TRANSFER ONLY (NO ACH TRANSFERS).
THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE INDIVIDUAL OR ENTITY TO WHOM IT IS ADDRESSED, AND MAY CONTAIN INFORMATION THAT IS PRIVILEGED, CONFIDENTIAL AND/OR OTHERWISE EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS TRANSMITTAL IN ERROR, PLEASE DELETE IT AND NOTIFY THIS OFFICE IMMEDIATELY
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Sebastian Jaramillo
Sent: Thursday, July 30, 2015 8:24 AM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
My understanding is that you are not allowed to collect attorney's fees on you Motion for Attorney's Fees. In other words, you cannot get fees on fees.
Sebastian Jaramillo, Esq.
[Image removed by sender.]
66 W. Flagler St Suite 500 Miami, FL 33130
Tel: (305) 600-3805 Fax: (786) 347-5562
www.lawjb.comhttp://www.lawjb.com
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited.
IMPORTANT TAX NOTICE: This communication is not written to be used, and cannot be used, by a taxpayer for the purpose of avoiding penalties that may be asserted against the taxpayer under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended.
On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 7:28 AM, Gioia DeCarlo <gdc@dvllclegal.commailto:gdc@dvllclegal.com> wrote:
The plaintiff’s case was dismissed. The judgment goes against the plaintiff (fair result, the plaintiff is the party that caused the unnecceary legal fees for your client).
Now, it may be the attorney filed with the wrong plaintiff in error or on the attorney’s advice, the case was brought by the wrong party and if so, maybe the attorney will step up and do the right thing and pay, but that’s between the plaintiff’s attorney and the plaintiff. The lawyer has no direct liability to your client of which I am aware.
Unless you get an agreement and the money right way, file your Motion to Determine Enititlement and To Tax Fees & Costs because you only have 30 days and the filing of it will likely make the other side realize they have to pay (you did prevail)— include your time for any research and drafting the motion and ask for the time that will be spent at hearing the motion. I doubt the fees will be so much that they will insist on a fee hearing to determine a reasonable fee amount (I am confident you will win on entitlement). I have never had to go that far — the times my client was entitled, the other side paid. But if you do go to a fee hearing, my understanding is that the plaintiff will then have to pay your time to prepare & attend the fee hearing and for your expert’s review of file and attendance at the fee hearing, all which make the fee hearing impractical for the plaintiff — even attending the hearing on your motion to detemine and tax is crazy for them to go. They will pay.
Gioia
Gdc@dvllclegal.commailto:Gdc@dvllclegal.com
[cid:image001.png@01D0CAA4.01258DB0]
This e-mail transmission and any documents, files or previous e-mail messages attached to it, are confidential and are protected by the attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine. If you are not the intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, disclosure, copying, dissemination, distribution or use of any of the information contained in, or attached to this e-mail transmission is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately notify me by forwarding this e-mail to Info@dvllclegal.commailto:Info@dvllclegal.com, or by telephone at (845) 321-0242tel:%28845%29%20321-0242 and then delete the message and its attachments from your computer.
From: <landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.orgmailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org> on behalf of Leonard Cabral <LensLaw@Lenslaw.commailto:LensLaw@Lenslaw.com>
Reply-To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee <landten@lists.flabarrpptl.orgmailto:landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org>
Date: Wednesday, July 29, 2015 at 10:37 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee <landten@lists.flabarrpptl.orgmailto:landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org>
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
I actually had a question a bout that. Who do I ask for fees if the plaintiff is the wrong party, the attorney as sanctions?
I may be able to call the attorney and work out fees but I still filed a motion for costs and attorney fees.
Leonard P. Cabral
Leonardcabral@lenslaw.commailto:Leonardcabral@lenslaw.com
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.orgmailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Gioia DeCarlo
Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2015 2:51 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
Hi Leonard
I hope you asked for legal fees!
If not, you have 30 days to file your motion for entitlement (under 83.48) and to tax fees and costs under Fl R. Civ. Pro. 1.525.
[cid:image001.png@01D0CAA4.01258DB0]
This e-mail transmission and any documents, files or previous e-mail messages attached to it, are confidential and are protected by the attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine. If you are not the intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, disclosure, copying, dissemination, distribution or use of any of the information contained in, or attached to this e-mail transmission is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately notify me by forwarding this e-mail to Info@dvllclegal.commailto:Info@dvllclegal.com, or by telephone at (845) 321-0242tel:%28845%29%20321-0242 and then delete the message and its attachments from your computer.
From: <landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.orgmailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org> on behalf of Leonard Cabral <LensLaw@Lenslaw.commailto:LensLaw@Lenslaw.com>
Reply-To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee <landten@lists.flabarrpptl.orgmailto:landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org>
Date: Tuesday, July 28, 2015 at 1:58 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee <landten@lists.flabarrpptl.orgmailto:landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org>
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
The problem with tenant defense is when the client brings in the complaint and the time the law requires a response. That doesn’t leave much time for research that I can do but not it that timeframe. So I must rely on the great lawyers on this list who have this information at their finger tips. Thanks again. YOU MADE MY DAY.
If Harry reads this, you should be able to figure out why this should also make your day.
Leonard P. Cabral, Esq.
Leonardcabral@lenslaw.commailto:Leonardcabral@lenslaw.com
Please disregard inadvertent misspellings
From:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.orgmailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Gioia DeCarlo
Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2015 11:05 AM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
Glad to hear it! And glad to be able help!
Gioia
[cid:image001.png@01D0CAA4.01258DB0]
This e-mail transmission and any documents, files or previous e-mail messages attached to it, are confidential and are protected by the attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine. If you are not the intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, disclosure, copying, dissemination, distribution or use of any of the information contained in, or attached to this e-mail transmission is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately notify me by forwarding this e-mail to Info@dvllclegal.commailto:Info@dvllclegal.com, or by telephone at (845) 321-0242tel:%28845%29%20321-0242 and then delete the message and its attachments from your computer.
From: <landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.orgmailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org> on behalf of Leonard Cabral <LensLaw@Lenslaw.commailto:LensLaw@Lenslaw.com>
Reply-To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee <landten@lists.flabarrpptl.orgmailto:landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org>
Date: Tuesday, July 28, 2015 at 10:56 AM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee <landten@lists.flabarrpptl.orgmailto:landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org>
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
Thank you for all you help. At the hearing on Plaintiff’s “Motion to Re-Serve and Amend” the judge stated with my motion to dismiss for standing. My motion was granted. Landlords cannot avoid the basic rule of standing ☺.
Leonard P. Cabral
Leonardcabral@lenslaw.commailto:Leonardcabral@lenslaw.com
From:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.orgmailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Gioia DeCarlo
Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 11:06 AM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
Oops! Just realized I attached the wrong Glynn document that although plaintiff must have standing at time of filing complaint, the affirmative defense of no standing must be raised or it is waived. Here it is.
Gioia
[cid:image001.png@01D0CAA4.01258DB0]
This e-mail transmission and any documents, files or previous e-mail messages attached to it, are confidential and are protected by the attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine. If you are not the intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, disclosure, copying, dissemination, distribution or use of any of the information contained in, or attached to this e-mail transmission is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately notify me by forwarding this e-mail to Info@dvllclegal.commailto:Info@dvllclegal.com, or by telephone at (845) 321-0242tel:%28845%29%20321-0242 and then delete the message and its attachments from your computer.
From: <landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.orgmailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org> on behalf of Eddy Leal <el@leallegal.commailto:el@leallegal.com>
Reply-To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee <landten@lists.flabarrpptl.orgmailto:landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org>
Date: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 at 10:08 AM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee <landten@lists.flabarrpptl.orgmailto:landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org>
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
You might find the attached foreclosure case helpful in your search.
Citing to the Jeff-Ray and Progressive, Second District recognizes that standing has to be met at the inception of the lawsuit. "The appellate courts are nonetheless compelled to reverse based on the district courts' application of a long line of supreme court cases applying the general principle that “the plaintiff's lack of standing at the inception of the case is not a defect that may be cured by the acquisition of standing after the case is filed.” Attached is the case.
Eddy Leal
Eddy Leal, P.A.
201 South Biscayne Blvd, Suite 2650
Miami, FL 33131
Office: 305-914-0071tel:305-914-0071
Fax: 305-901-2378tel:305-901-2378
E-Mail: el@leallegal.commailto:el@leallegal.com
On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 9:23 AM, Gioia DeCarlo <gdc@dvllclegal.commailto:gdc@dvllclegal.com> wrote:
Standing must exist at time of the filing of the lawsuit. If not, the case must be dismissed. Jeff-Ray case, Progressive case, attached. Lack of standing at time of filing cannot be cured after the fact by substitution of parites — one can’t transfer what one doesn’t have. Lack of standing, however, is a raise-or-waive affirmative defense (see Glynn case attached).
Fl.R.Civ.Prohttp://Fl.R.Civ.Pro 1.260 allows for substitution of parites if the the interest is transferred from the original party to another by order of court. One who lacks interest in the subject matter cannot transfer the interest to another. The case must be dismissed and re-filed by one who has standing.
Note there are numerous standing cases in the foreclosure context as banks were filing all the time without standing.
Hope this helps.
Gioia
[cid:image001.png@01D0CAA4.01258DB0]
This e-mail transmission and any documents, files or previous e-mail messages attached to it, are confidential and are protected by the attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine. If you are not the intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, disclosure, copying, dissemination, distribution or use of any of the information contained in, or attached to this e-mail transmission is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately notify me by forwarding this e-mail to Info@dvllclegal.commailto:Info@dvllclegal.com, or by telephone at (845) 321-0242tel:%28845%29%20321-0242 and then delete the message and its attachments from your computer.
From: <landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.orgmailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org> on behalf of Leonard Cabral <LensLaw@Lenslaw.commailto:LensLaw@Lenslaw.com>
Reply-To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee <landten@lists.flabarrpptl.orgmailto:landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org>
Date: Monday, July 20, 2015 at 11:40 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee <landten@lists.flabarrpptl.orgmailto:landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org>
Subject: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
Group:
83.60(1)(a) “The landlord must be given an opportunity to cure a deficiency in a notice or in the pleadings before dismissal of the action.” A complaint was filed by an Orlando attorney with the wrong landlord’s name. (no standing). -He has now a motion to amend pursuant to 83.60 to change the name of the plaintiff. Is standing a deficiency in the pleadings that can be amended?Does anyone have the legislative intent they are willing to share? Any ideas welcome.
Leonard P. Cabral, Esq.
212 North Park Ave.,
Sanford, FL 32771
Leonardcabral@lenslaw.commailto:Leonardcabral@lenslaw.com
(407)330-4998tel:%28407%29330-4998
The information herein is legally privileged For Official Use Only and protected under the Privacy Acto of 1974, as amended. Unauthorized disclosure or misue of this Personal Information may result in criminal and/or civil penalties." If you have received this e-mail message in error, please reply to sender immediately with the statement "RECEIVED IN ERROR"and destroy the original message.
_______________________________________________ landten mailing list landten@lists.flabarrpptl.orgmailto:landten@lists.flabarrpptl.orghttp://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten
landten mailing list
landten@lists.flabarrpptl.orgmailto:landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten
_______________________________________________ landten mailing list landten@lists.flabarrpptl.orgmailto:landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten
_______________________________________________ landten mailing list landten@lists.flabarrpptl.orgmailto:landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten
_______________________________________________ landten mailing list landten@lists.flabarrpptl.orgmailto:landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten
_______________________________________________ landten mailing list landten@lists.flabarrpptl.orgmailto:landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten
landten mailing list
landten@lists.flabarrpptl.orgmailto:landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten
I believe that reading of Las Olas also applies to the mobile home
statute. The fee provision is, "723.068 Attorney’s fees.—Except as
provided in s. 723.037
http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0700-0799/0723/Sections/0723.037.html,
in any proceeding between private parties to enforce provisions of this
chapter, the prevailing party is entitled to a reasonable attorney’s fee."
Dennis A. Chen, Esq.
Chen Law Firm, PA
13360 W. Colonial Dr, Ste. 470
Winter Garden, Florida 34787
Tel: (407) 392-1872
dennis@chenlaw.net
Bankruptcy * Civil Litigation * Landlord/Tenant * Personal Injury * Real
Estate Litigation
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail, including any attachment, contains
legally privileged and confidential information and is intended solely for
the recipient. Should the intended recipient forward this message to any
person or entity, that action could constitute a waiver of the
attorney-client privilege. If the reader of this message is not the
intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination,
distribution, or copying of this communication is prohibited. If this
communication was sent or received in error, please notify us by reply
e-mail and delete the original message.
On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 8:44 AM, Manuel Farach MFarach@richmangreer.com
wrote:
Les is correct; that is the Waverly Condominium case out of the
Fourth DCA
Manuel Farach / Of Counsel - Board Certified in Real Estate Law and
Business Litigation by The Florida Bar
Richman Greer P.A.
One Clearlake Centre
Suite 1504
250 Australian Avenue South
West Palm Beach, Florida 33401
Office: 561.803.3500
Fax: 561.820.1608
Direct: 561.803.3501
Email: MFarach@richmangreer.com
V-card http://richmangreer.com/uploads/vcards/VcardFarach.vcf
U.S. Treasury Regulation Circular 230 requires us to advise you that
written communications issued by us are not intended to be and cannot be
relied upon to avoid penalties that may be imposed by the Internal Revenue
Service.
Incoming emails are filtered which may delay receipt. This email is
personal to the named recipient(s) and may be privileged and confidential.
If you are not the intended recipient, you received this in error. If so,
any review, dissemination, or copying of this email is prohibited. Please
immediately notify us by email and delete the original message.
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:
landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] *On Behalf Of *lesstevens
Sent: Thursday, July 30, 2015 8:34 AM
To: 'RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee'
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
Unless there is a provision in the Lease which states that it includes
fees/costs relating to the determination of said fees/costs….had a judge
bring that to my attention once, and now I include it in every document
where attorneys’ fees could be recovered.
Les H. Stevens, Esquire
Les H. Stevens, P.A.
5301 North Federal Highway
Suite 130
Boca Raton, Florida 33487
Tel. - (561) 989-9797
Fax - (561) 989-8484
E-Mail - lesstevens@earthlink.net
*OUR OFFICE NO LONGER ACCEPTS CASHIER'S OR BANK CHECKS AT CLOSING. ALL
FUNDS MUST BE RECEIVED IN THE FORM OF A SAME DAY WIRE TRANSFER ONLY (NO
ACH TRANSFERS). *
THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE INDIVIDUAL OR ENTITY TO
WHOM IT IS ADDRESSED, AND MAY CONTAIN INFORMATION THAT IS PRIVILEGED,
CONFIDENTIAL AND/OR OTHERWISE EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED
THIS TRANSMITTAL IN ERROR, PLEASE DELETE IT AND NOTIFY THIS OFFICE
IMMEDIATELY
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:
landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] *On Behalf Of *Sebastian Jaramillo
Sent: Thursday, July 30, 2015 8:24 AM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
My understanding is that you are not allowed to collect attorney's fees on
you Motion for Attorney's Fees. In other words, you cannot get fees on
fees.
Sebastian Jaramillo, Esq.
[image: Image removed by sender.]
66 W. Flagler St Suite 500 Miami, FL 33130
Tel: (305) 600-3805 Fax: (786) 347-5562
www.lawjb.com
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended
solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed.
If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager.
This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the
individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not
disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender
immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and
delete this e-mail from your system. If you are not the intended recipient
you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any
action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly
prohibited.
IMPORTANT TAX NOTICE: This communication is not written to be used, and
cannot be used, by a taxpayer for the purpose of avoiding penalties that
may be asserted against the taxpayer under the Internal Revenue Code of
1986, as amended.
On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 7:28 AM, Gioia DeCarlo gdc@dvllclegal.com wrote:
The plaintiff’s case was dismissed. The judgment goes against the
plaintiff (fair result, the plaintiff is the party that caused the
unnecceary legal fees for your client).
Now, it may be the attorney filed with the wrong plaintiff in error or on
the attorney’s advice, the case was brought by the wrong party and if so,
maybe the attorney will step up and do the right thing and pay, but that’s
between the plaintiff’s attorney and the plaintiff. The lawyer has no
direct liability to your client of which I am aware.
Unless you get an agreement and the money right way, file your Motion to
Determine Enititlement and To Tax Fees & Costs because you only have 30
days and the filing of it will likely make the other side realize they have
to pay (you did prevail)— include your time for any research and drafting
the motion and ask for the time that will be spent at hearing the motion.
I doubt the fees will be so much that they will insist on a fee hearing to
determine a reasonable fee amount (I am confident you will win on
entitlement). I have never had to go that far — the times my client was
entitled, the other side paid. But if you do go to a fee hearing, my
understanding is that the plaintiff will then have to pay your time to
prepare & attend the fee hearing and for your expert’s review of file and
attendance at the fee hearing, all which make the fee hearing impractical
for the plaintiff — even attending the hearing on your motion to detemine
and tax is crazy for them to go. They will pay.
Gioia
This e-mail transmission and any documents, files or previous e-mail
messages attached to it, are confidential and are protected by the
attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine. If you are not the
intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it to the
intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, disclosure,
copying, dissemination, distribution or use of any of the information
contained in, or attached to this e-mail transmission is STRICTLY
PROHIBITED. If you have received this transmission in error, please
immediately notify me by forwarding this e-mail to Info@dvllclegal.com,
or by telephone at (845) 321-0242 and then delete the message and its
attachments from your computer.
*From: *landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org on behalf of Leonard
Cabral LensLaw@Lenslaw.com
*Reply-To: *RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee <landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
*Date: *Wednesday, July 29, 2015 at 10:37 PM
*To: *RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
*Subject: *Re: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
I actually had a question a bout that. Who do I ask for fees if the
plaintiff is the wrong party, the attorney as sanctions?
I may be able to call the attorney and work out fees but I still filed a
motion for costs and attorney fees.
Leonard P. Cabral
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [
mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org
landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] *On Behalf Of *Gioia DeCarlo
Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2015 2:51 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
Hi Leonard
I hope you asked for legal fees!
If not, you have 30 days to file your motion for entitlement (under 83.48)
and to tax fees and costs under Fl R. Civ. Pro. 1.525.
This e-mail transmission and any documents, files or previous e-mail
messages attached to it, are confidential and are protected by the
attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine. If you are not the
intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it to the
intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, disclosure,
copying, dissemination, distribution or use of any of the information
contained in, or attached to this e-mail transmission is STRICTLY
PROHIBITED. If you have received this transmission in error, please
immediately notify me by forwarding this e-mail to Info@dvllclegal.com,
or by telephone at (845) 321-0242 and then delete the message and its
attachments from your computer.
*From: *landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org on behalf of Leonard
Cabral LensLaw@Lenslaw.com
*Reply-To: *RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee <landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
*Date: *Tuesday, July 28, 2015 at 1:58 PM
*To: *RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
*Subject: *Re: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
The problem with tenant defense is when the client brings in the complaint
and the time the law requires a response. That doesn’t leave much time for
research that I can do but not it that timeframe. So I must rely on the
great lawyers on this list who have this information at their finger tips.
Thanks again. YOU MADE MY DAY.
If Harry reads this, you should be able to figure out why this should also
make your day.
Leonard P. Cabral, Esq.
Please disregard inadvertent misspellings
*From:*landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [
mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org
landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] *On Behalf Of *Gioia DeCarlo
Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2015 11:05 AM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
Glad to hear it! And glad to be able help!
Gioia
This e-mail transmission and any documents, files or previous e-mail
messages attached to it, are confidential and are protected by the
attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine. If you are not the
intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it to the
intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, disclosure,
copying, dissemination, distribution or use of any of the information
contained in, or attached to this e-mail transmission is STRICTLY
PROHIBITED. If you have received this transmission in error, please
immediately notify me by forwarding this e-mail to Info@dvllclegal.com,
or by telephone at (845) 321-0242 and then delete the message and its
attachments from your computer.
*From: *landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org on behalf of Leonard
Cabral LensLaw@Lenslaw.com
*Reply-To: *RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee <landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
*Date: *Tuesday, July 28, 2015 at 10:56 AM
*To: *RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
*Subject: *Re: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
Thank you for all you help. At the hearing on Plaintiff’s “Motion to
Re-Serve and Amend” the judge stated with my motion to dismiss for
standing. My motion was granted. Landlords cannot avoid the basic rule of
standing J.
Leonard P. Cabral
*From:*landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [
mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org
landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] *On Behalf Of *Gioia DeCarlo
Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 11:06 AM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
Oops! Just realized I attached the wrong Glynn document that although
plaintiff must have standing at time of filing complaint, the affirmative
defense of no standing must be raised or it is waived. Here it is.
Gioia
This e-mail transmission and any documents, files or previous e-mail
messages attached to it, are confidential and are protected by the
attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine. If you are not the
intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it to the
intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, disclosure,
copying, dissemination, distribution or use of any of the information
contained in, or attached to this e-mail transmission is STRICTLY
PROHIBITED. If you have received this transmission in error, please
immediately notify me by forwarding this e-mail to Info@dvllclegal.com,
or by telephone at (845) 321-0242 and then delete the message and its
attachments from your computer.
*From: *landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org on behalf of Eddy Leal <
el@leallegal.com>
*Reply-To: *RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee <landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
*Date: *Tuesday, July 21, 2015 at 10:08 AM
*To: *RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
*Subject: *Re: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
You might find the attached foreclosure case helpful in your search.
Citing to the *Jeff-Ray *and Progressive, Second District recognizes
that standing has to be met at the inception of the lawsuit. "The
appellate courts are nonetheless compelled to reverse based on the district
courts' application of a long line of supreme court cases applying the
general principle that “the plaintiff's lack of standing at the inception
of the case is not a defect that may be cured by the acquisition of
standing after the case is filed.” Attached is the case.
Eddy Leal
Eddy Leal, P.A.
201 South Biscayne Blvd, Suite 2650
Miami, FL 33131
Office: 305-914-0071
Fax: 305-901-2378
E-Mail: el@leallegal.com
On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 9:23 AM, Gioia DeCarlo gdc@dvllclegal.com wrote:
Standing must exist at time of the filing of the lawsuit. If not, the
case must be dismissed. Jeff-Ray case, Progressive case, attached. Lack
of standing at time of filing cannot be cured after the fact by
substitution of parites — one can’t transfer what one doesn’t have. Lack
of standing, however, is a raise-or-waive affirmative defense (see Glynn
case attached).
Fl.R.Civ.Pro 1.260 allows for substitution of parites if the the interest
is transferred from the original party to another by order of court. One
who lacks interest in the subject matter cannot transfer the interest to
another. The case must be dismissed and re-filed by one who has standing.
Note there are numerous standing cases in the foreclosure context as banks
were filing all the time without standing.
Hope this helps.
Gioia
This e-mail transmission and any documents, files or previous e-mail
messages attached to it, are confidential and are protected by the
attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine. If you are not the
intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it to the
intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, disclosure,
copying, dissemination, distribution or use of any of the information
contained in, or attached to this e-mail transmission is STRICTLY
PROHIBITED. If you have received this transmission in error, please
immediately notify me by forwarding this e-mail to Info@dvllclegal.com,
or by telephone at (845) 321-0242 and then delete the message and its
attachments from your computer.
*From: *landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org on behalf of Leonard
Cabral LensLaw@Lenslaw.com
*Reply-To: *RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee <landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
*Date: *Monday, July 20, 2015 at 11:40 PM
*To: *RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
*Subject: *[RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
Group:
83.60(1)(a) “The landlord must be given an opportunity to cure a
deficiency in a notice or in the pleadings before dismissal of the
action.” A complaint was filed by an Orlando attorney with the wrong
landlord’s name. (no standing). -He has now a motion to amend pursuant to
83.60 to change the name of the plaintiff. Is standing a deficiency in the
pleadings that can be amended?Does anyone have the legislative intent they
are willing to share? Any ideas welcome.
Leonard P. Cabral, Esq.
212 North Park Ave.,
Sanford, FL 32771
(407)330-4998
The information herein is legally privileged For Official Use Only and
protected under the Privacy Acto of 1974, as amended. Unauthorized
disclosure or misue of this Personal Information may result in criminal
and/or civil penalties." If you have received this e-mail message in
error, please reply to sender immediately with the statement "RECEIVED IN
ERROR"and destroy the original message.
_______________________________________________ landten mailing list
landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten
landten mailing list
landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten
_______________________________________________ landten mailing list
landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten
_______________________________________________ landten mailing list
landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten
_______________________________________________ landten mailing list
landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten
_______________________________________________ landten mailing list
landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten
landten mailing list
landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten
landten mailing list
landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten
I read Waverly to support getting fees for having to fight for, and collect,
fees. Of course, I have never gone so far to do a fee hearing. I checked
this morning with a friend of mine in Palm Beach County who has done many
fee hearings. He cites Waverly all the time to get his fees for working for
his fees, in a foreclosure and 57.105 context ,and he prevails. He doesn’t
know why a judge would rule otherwise.
This e-mail transmission and any documents, files or previous e-mail
messages attached to it, are confidential and are protected by the
attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine. If you are not the
intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it to the
intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, disclosure,
copying, dissemination, distribution or use of any of the information
contained in, or attached to this e-mail transmission is STRICTLY
PROHIBITED. If you have received this transmission in error, please
immediately notify me by forwarding this e-mail to Info@dvllclegal.com, or
by telephone at (845) 321-0242 and then delete the message and its
attachments from your computer.
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org on behalf of lesstevens
lesstevens@earthlink.net
Organization: Les H. Stevens, P.A.
Reply-To: lesstevens@earthlink.net, RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
Date: Thursday, July 30, 2015 at 8:34 AM
To: 'RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee' landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
Unless there is a provision in the Lease which states that it includes
fees/costs relating to the determination of said fees/costs….had a judge
bring that to my attention once, and now I include it in every document
where attorneys’ fees could be recovered.
Les H. Stevens, Esquire
Les H. Stevens, P.A.
5301 North Federal Highway
Suite 130
Boca Raton, Florida 33487
Tel. - (561) 989-9797
Fax - (561) 989-8484
E-Mail - lesstevens@earthlink.net
OUR OFFICE NO LONGER ACCEPTS CASHIER'S OR BANK CHECKS AT CLOSING. ALL FUNDS
MUST BE RECEIVED IN THE FORM OF A SAME DAY WIRE TRANSFER ONLY (NO ACH
TRANSFERS).
THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE INDIVIDUAL OR ENTITY TO
WHOM IT IS ADDRESSED, AND MAY CONTAIN INFORMATION THAT IS PRIVILEGED,
CONFIDENTIAL AND/OR OTHERWISE EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED
THIS TRANSMITTAL IN ERROR, PLEASE DELETE IT AND NOTIFY THIS OFFICE
IMMEDIATELY
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org
[mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Sebastian
Jaramillo
Sent: Thursday, July 30, 2015 8:24 AM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
My understanding is that you are not allowed to collect attorney's fees on
you Motion for Attorney's Fees. In other words, you cannot get fees on fees.
Sebastian Jaramillo, Esq.
66 W. Flagler St Suite 500 Miami, FL 33130
Tel: (305) 600-3805 Fax: (786) 347-5562
www.lawjb.com http://www.lawjb.com
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended
solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed.
If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager.
This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the
individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not
disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender
immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete
this e-mail from your system. If you are not the intended recipient you are
notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in
reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited.
IMPORTANT TAX NOTICE: This communication is not written to be used, and
cannot be used, by a taxpayer for the purpose of avoiding penalties that may
be asserted against the taxpayer under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as
amended.
On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 7:28 AM, Gioia DeCarlo gdc@dvllclegal.com wrote:
The plaintiff’s case was dismissed. The judgment goes against the plaintiff
(fair result, the plaintiff is the party that caused the unnecceary legal
fees for your client).
Now, it may be the attorney filed with the wrong plaintiff in error or on
the attorney’s advice, the case was brought by the wrong party and if so,
maybe the attorney will step up and do the right thing and pay, but that’s
between the plaintiff’s attorney and the plaintiff. The lawyer has no
direct liability to your client of which I am aware.
Unless you get an agreement and the money right way, file your Motion to
Determine Enititlement and To Tax Fees & Costs because you only have 30 days
and the filing of it will likely make the other side realize they have to
pay (you did prevail)— include your time for any research and drafting the
motion and ask for the time that will be spent at hearing the motion. I
doubt the fees will be so much that they will insist on a fee hearing to
determine a reasonable fee amount (I am confident you will win on
entitlement). I have never had to go that far — the times my client was
entitled, the other side paid. But if you do go to a fee hearing, my
understanding is that the plaintiff will then have to pay your time to
prepare & attend the fee hearing and for your expert’s review of file and
attendance at the fee hearing, all which make the fee hearing impractical
for the plaintiff — even attending the hearing on your motion to detemine
and tax is crazy for them to go. They will pay.
Gioia
This e-mail transmission and any documents, files or previous e-mail
messages attached to it, are confidential and are protected by the
attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine. If you are not the
intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it to the
intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, disclosure,
copying, dissemination, distribution or use of any of the information
contained in, or attached to this e-mail transmission is STRICTLY
PROHIBITED. If you have received this transmission in error, please
immediately notify me by forwarding this e-mail to Info@dvllclegal.com
mailto:Info@dvllclegal.com , or by telephone at (845) 321-0242
tel:%28845%29%20321-0242 and then delete the message and its attachments
from your computer.
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org on behalf of Leonard Cabral
LensLaw@Lenslaw.com
Reply-To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
Date: Wednesday, July 29, 2015 at 10:37 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
I actually had a question a bout that. Who do I ask for fees if the
plaintiff is the wrong party, the attorney as sanctions?
I may be able to call the attorney and work out fees but I still filed a
motion for costs and attorney fees.
Leonard P. Cabral
Leonardcabral@lenslaw.com
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org
[mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Gioia DeCarlo
Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2015 2:51 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
Hi Leonard
I hope you asked for legal fees!
If not, you have 30 days to file your motion for entitlement (under 83.48)
and to tax fees and costs under Fl R. Civ. Pro. 1.525.
This e-mail transmission and any documents, files or previous e-mail
messages attached to it, are confidential and are protected by the
attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine. If you are not the
intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it to the
intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, disclosure,
copying, dissemination, distribution or use of any of the information
contained in, or attached to this e-mail transmission is STRICTLY
PROHIBITED. If you have received this transmission in error, please
immediately notify me by forwarding this e-mail to Info@dvllclegal.com
mailto:Info@dvllclegal.com , or by telephone at (845) 321-0242
tel:%28845%29%20321-0242 and then delete the message and its attachments
from your computer.
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org on behalf of Leonard Cabral
LensLaw@Lenslaw.com
Reply-To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
Date: Tuesday, July 28, 2015 at 1:58 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
The problem with tenant defense is when the client brings in the complaint
and the time the law requires a response. That doesn’t leave much time for
research that I can do but not it that timeframe. So I must rely on the
great lawyers on this list who have this information at their finger tips.
Thanks again. YOU MADE MY DAY.
If Harry reads this, you should be able to figure out why this should also
make your day.
Leonard P. Cabral, Esq.
Leonardcabral@lenslaw.com
Please disregard inadvertent misspellings
From:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org
[mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Gioia DeCarlo
Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2015 11:05 AM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
Glad to hear it! And glad to be able help!
Gioia
This e-mail transmission and any documents, files or previous e-mail
messages attached to it, are confidential and are protected by the
attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine. If you are not the
intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it to the
intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, disclosure,
copying, dissemination, distribution or use of any of the information
contained in, or attached to this e-mail transmission is STRICTLY
PROHIBITED. If you have received this transmission in error, please
immediately notify me by forwarding this e-mail to Info@dvllclegal.com
mailto:Info@dvllclegal.com , or by telephone at (845) 321-0242
tel:%28845%29%20321-0242 and then delete the message and its attachments
from your computer.
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org on behalf of Leonard Cabral
LensLaw@Lenslaw.com
Reply-To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
Date: Tuesday, July 28, 2015 at 10:56 AM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
Thank you for all you help. At the hearing on Plaintiff’s “Motion to
Re-Serve and Amend” the judge stated with my motion to dismiss for standing.
My motion was granted. Landlords cannot avoid the basic rule of standing J.
Leonard P. Cabral
Leonardcabral@lenslaw.com
From:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org
[mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Gioia DeCarlo
Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 11:06 AM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
Oops! Just realized I attached the wrong Glynn document that although
plaintiff must have standing at time of filing complaint, the affirmative
defense of no standing must be raised or it is waived. Here it is.
Gioia
This e-mail transmission and any documents, files or previous e-mail
messages attached to it, are confidential and are protected by the
attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine. If you are not the
intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it to the
intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, disclosure,
copying, dissemination, distribution or use of any of the information
contained in, or attached to this e-mail transmission is STRICTLY
PROHIBITED. If you have received this transmission in error, please
immediately notify me by forwarding this e-mail to Info@dvllclegal.com
mailto:Info@dvllclegal.com , or by telephone at (845) 321-0242
tel:%28845%29%20321-0242 and then delete the message and its attachments
from your computer.
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org on behalf of Eddy Leal
el@leallegal.com
Reply-To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
Date: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 at 10:08 AM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
You might find the attached foreclosure case helpful in your search.
Citing to the Jeff-Ray and Progressive, Second District recognizes that
standing has to be met at the inception of the lawsuit. "The appellate
courts are nonetheless compelled to reverse based on the district courts'
application of a long line of supreme court cases applying the general
principle that “the plaintiff's lack of standing at the inception of the
case is not a defect that may be cured by the acquisition of standing after
the case is filed.” Attached is the case.
Eddy Leal
Eddy Leal, P.A.
201 South Biscayne Blvd, Suite 2650
Miami, FL 33131
Office: 305-914-0071 tel:305-914-0071
Fax: 305-901-2378 tel:305-901-2378
E-Mail: el@leallegal.com
On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 9:23 AM, Gioia DeCarlo gdc@dvllclegal.com wrote:
Standing must exist at time of the filing of the lawsuit. If not, the case
must be dismissed. Jeff-Ray case, Progressive case, attached. Lack of
standing at time of filing cannot be cured after the fact by substitution of
parites — one can’t transfer what one doesn’t have. Lack of standing,
however, is a raise-or-waive affirmative defense (see Glynn case attached).
Fl.R.Civ.Pro http://Fl.R.Civ.Pro 1.260 allows for substitution of parites
if the the interest is transferred from the original party to another by
order of court. One who lacks interest in the subject matter cannot
transfer the interest to another. The case must be dismissed and re-filed
by one who has standing.
Note there are numerous standing cases in the foreclosure context as banks
were filing all the time without standing.
Hope this helps.
Gioia
This e-mail transmission and any documents, files or previous e-mail
messages attached to it, are confidential and are protected by the
attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine. If you are not the
intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it to the
intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, disclosure,
copying, dissemination, distribution or use of any of the information
contained in, or attached to this e-mail transmission is STRICTLY
PROHIBITED. If you have received this transmission in error, please
immediately notify me by forwarding this e-mail to Info@dvllclegal.com
mailto:Info@dvllclegal.com , or by telephone at (845) 321-0242
tel:%28845%29%20321-0242 and then delete the message and its attachments
from your computer.
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org on behalf of Leonard Cabral
LensLaw@Lenslaw.com
Reply-To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
Date: Monday, July 20, 2015 at 11:40 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
Subject: [RPPTL LandTen] I need clarification on 83.60
Group:
83.60(1)(a) “The landlord must be given an opportunity to cure a deficiency
in a notice or in the pleadings before dismissal of the action.” A
complaint was filed by an Orlando attorney with the wrong landlord’s name.
(no standing). -He has now a motion to amend pursuant to 83.60 to change the
name of the plaintiff. Is standing a deficiency in the pleadings that can be
amended?Does anyone have the legislative intent they are willing to share?
Any ideas welcome.
Leonard P. Cabral, Esq.
212 North Park Ave.,
Sanford, FL 32771
(407)330-4998 tel:%28407%29330-4998
The information herein is legally privileged For Official Use Only and
protected under the Privacy Acto of 1974, as amended. Unauthorized
disclosure or misue of this Personal Information may result in criminal
and/or civil penalties." If you have received this e-mail message in error,
please reply to sender immediately with the statement "RECEIVED IN ERROR"and
destroy the original message.
_______________________________________________ landten mailing list
landten@lists.flabarrpptl.orghttp://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten
landten mailing list
landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten
_______________________________________________ landten mailing list
landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten
_______________________________________________ landten mailing list
landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten
_______________________________________________ landten mailing list
landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten
_______________________________________________ landten mailing list
landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten
landten mailing list
landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten
_______________________________________________ landten mailing list
landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten
