Empathy List Archives

AJ

Anthony J. Horky

Wed, Mar 6, 2013 4:57 PM

Hello Members: I am seeking opinion on the following commercial tenant
eviction scenario:

Section 83.232(1) requires inter alia that "the tenant shall pay into the
court registry the amount alleged in the complaint as unpaid, or, if such
amount is contested, such amount as determined by the court, and any rent
accruing during the pendency of the action when due, unless the tenant has
interposed the defense of payment or satisfaction of the rent in the amount
the complaint alleges as unpaid."

Rent is due on the 1st of each month. Landlord institutes eviction action on
the 28th of February. My tenant is contesting the amount of rent alleged as
unpaid, but not the actual monthly rent amount. Is landlord entitled to
entry of a default final judgment of eviction if the tenant does not
voluntarily, and without court order, pay the March 1, 2013 monthly rent as
it accrues? Subsection (5) says" "Failure of the tenant to pay the rent
into the court registry pursuant to court order shall be deemed an absolute
waiver of the tenant's defenses." However, nowhere in this statute does it
provide a remedy if the tenant does not voluntarily pay the "rent as it
accrues" absent a court order.

Any opinion is welcome. Thank you.

Regards,

AJH Logo mark

Anthony J. Horky, Esquire

Anthony J. Horky, P.A.

2255 Glades Road, Suite 324A

Boca Raton, Florida 33431

T: 561.989.3206

F. 561.989.3204

http://www.horkylaw.com www.horkylaw.com

This message and the documents attached to it, if any, are intended only for
the use of the addressee and may contain information that is attorney-client
privileged or confidential, and/or may contain attorney work product. If
you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any
dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have
received this communication in error, please delete all electronic copies of
this message and its attachments, if any, destroy any hard copies you may
have created and notify me immediately at: mailto:ahorky@horkylaw.com
ahorky@horkylaw.com.

Tax Advice Disclosure: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the
IRS under Circular 230, we inform you that any U.S. federal tax advice
contained in this communication (including any attachments), unless
otherwise specifically stated, was not intended or written to be used, and
cannot be used, for the purpose of (1) avoiding penalties under the Internal
Revenue Code or (2) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party
any matters addressed herein.

Hello Members: I am seeking opinion on the following commercial tenant eviction scenario: Section 83.232(1) requires inter alia that "the tenant shall pay into the court registry the amount alleged in the complaint as unpaid, or, if such amount is contested, such amount as determined by the court, and any rent accruing during the pendency of the action when due, unless the tenant has interposed the defense of payment or satisfaction of the rent in the amount the complaint alleges as unpaid." Rent is due on the 1st of each month. Landlord institutes eviction action on the 28th of February. My tenant is contesting the amount of rent alleged as unpaid, but not the actual monthly rent amount. Is landlord entitled to entry of a default final judgment of eviction if the tenant does not voluntarily, and without court order, pay the March 1, 2013 monthly rent as it accrues? Subsection (5) says" "Failure of the tenant to pay the rent into the court registry pursuant to court order shall be deemed an absolute waiver of the tenant's defenses." However, nowhere in this statute does it provide a remedy if the tenant does not voluntarily pay the "rent as it accrues" absent a court order. Any opinion is welcome. Thank you. Regards, AJH Logo mark Anthony J. Horky, Esquire Anthony J. Horky, P.A. 2255 Glades Road, Suite 324A Boca Raton, Florida 33431 T: 561.989.3206 F. 561.989.3204 <http://www.horkylaw.com> www.horkylaw.com This message and the documents attached to it, if any, are intended only for the use of the addressee and may contain information that is attorney-client privileged or confidential, and/or may contain attorney work product. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please delete all electronic copies of this message and its attachments, if any, destroy any hard copies you may have created and notify me immediately at: <mailto:ahorky@horkylaw.com> ahorky@horkylaw.com. ------------------------------------------------------- Tax Advice Disclosure: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS under Circular 230, we inform you that any U.S. federal tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments), unless otherwise specifically stated, was not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (1) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (2) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any matters addressed herein.

LJ

Lainie J. Simon

Wed, Mar 6, 2013 5:27 PM

Move for a final default judgment or in the alternative an order requiring rent to be deposited.

The word "entitled" is not a good one to use. The Court won't do it without giving him a chance. If he contested, he probably filed a motion already. The Court will set a hearing, if in PBC, to be held within 10 days anyway.

On Mar 6, 2013, at 11:57 AM, Anthony J. Horky wrote:

Hello Members: I am seeking opinion on the following commercial tenant eviction scenario:

Section 83.232(1) requires inter alia that “the tenant shall pay into the court registry the amount alleged in the complaint as unpaid, or, if such amount is contested, such amount as determined by the court, and any rent accruing during the pendency of the action when due, unless the tenant has interposed the defense of payment or satisfaction of the rent in the amount the complaint alleges as unpaid.”

Rent is due on the 1st of each month. Landlord institutes eviction action on the 28th of February. My tenant is contesting the amount of rent alleged as unpaid, but not the actual monthly rent amount. Is landlord entitled to entry of a default final judgment of eviction if the tenant does not voluntarily, and without court order, pay the March 1, 2013 monthly rent as it accrues? Subsection (5) says” “Failure of the tenant to pay the rent into the court registry pursuant to court order shall be deemed an absolute waiver of the tenant’s defenses.” However, nowhere in this statute does it provide a remedy if the tenant does not voluntarily pay the “rent as it accrues” absent a court order.

Any opinion is welcome. Thank you.

Regards,

<image003.png>
Anthony J. Horky, Esquire

Anthony J. Horky, P.A.

2255 Glades Road, Suite 324A

Boca Raton, Florida 33431

T: 561.989.3206

F. 561.989.3204

www.horkylaw.com

This message and the documents attached to it, if any, are intended only for the use of the addressee and may contain information that is attorney-client privileged or confidential, and/or may contain attorney work product. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please delete all electronic copies of this message and its attachments, if any, destroy any hard copies you may have created and notify me immediately at: ahorky@horkylaw.com.

Tax Advice Disclosure: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS under Circular 230, we inform you that any U.S. federal tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments), unless otherwise specifically stated, was not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (1) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (2) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any matters addressed herein.

landten mailing list
landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten

Lainie J. Simon, Esq.
185 NW Spanish River Boulevard
Suite 220
Boca Raton, FL 33431
561.445.1361
561.997.6224(fax)

PRIVILEGE AND CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521 and is legally privileged. The contents of this e-mail message and any attachments are intended solely for the party or parties addressed and named in this message. This communication and all attachments, if any, are intended to be and to remain confidential, and it may be subject to the applicable attorney - client and or work product privileges. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, or if this message has been addressed to you in error, please immediately alert the sender by reply e-mail and then delete this message and its attachments. Do not deliver, distribute, or copy this message and or any attachments if you are not the intended recipient. Do not disclose the contents or take any action in reliance upon the information contained in this communication or any attachments. Although this E-mail and any attachments are believed to be free of any virus or other defect that might affect any computer system into which it is received and opened, it is the responsibility of the recipient to ensure that it is virus free and no responsibility is accepted by the sender for damage arising in any way from its use.
Ê

Move for a final default judgment or in the alternative an order requiring rent to be deposited. The word "entitled" is not a good one to use. The Court won't do it without giving him a chance. If he contested, he probably filed a motion already. The Court will set a hearing, if in PBC, to be held within 10 days anyway. On Mar 6, 2013, at 11:57 AM, Anthony J. Horky wrote: > Hello Members: I am seeking opinion on the following commercial tenant eviction scenario: > > Section 83.232(1) requires inter alia that “the tenant shall pay into the court registry the amount alleged in the complaint as unpaid, or, if such amount is contested, such amount as determined by the court, and any rent accruing during the pendency of the action when due, unless the tenant has interposed the defense of payment or satisfaction of the rent in the amount the complaint alleges as unpaid.” > > Rent is due on the 1st of each month. Landlord institutes eviction action on the 28th of February. My tenant is contesting the amount of rent alleged as unpaid, but not the actual monthly rent amount. Is landlord entitled to entry of a default final judgment of eviction if the tenant does not voluntarily, and without court order, pay the March 1, 2013 monthly rent as it accrues? Subsection (5) says” “Failure of the tenant to pay the rent into the court registry pursuant to court order shall be deemed an absolute waiver of the tenant’s defenses.” However, nowhere in this statute does it provide a remedy if the tenant does not voluntarily pay the “rent as it accrues” absent a court order. > > Any opinion is welcome. Thank you. > > Regards, > > > <image003.png> > Anthony J. Horky, Esquire > > Anthony J. Horky, P.A. > > 2255 Glades Road, Suite 324A > > Boca Raton, Florida 33431 > > T: 561.989.3206 > > F. 561.989.3204 > > www.horkylaw.com > > > This message and the documents attached to it, if any, are intended only for the use of the addressee and may contain information that is attorney-client privileged or confidential, and/or may contain attorney work product. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please delete all electronic copies of this message and its attachments, if any, destroy any hard copies you may have created and notify me immediately at: ahorky@horkylaw.com. > ------------------------------------------------------- > Tax Advice Disclosure: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS under Circular 230, we inform you that any U.S. federal tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments), unless otherwise specifically stated, was not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (1) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (2) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any matters addressed herein. > > > > _______________________________________________ > landten mailing list > landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org > http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten Lainie J. Simon, Esq. 185 NW Spanish River Boulevard Suite 220 Boca Raton, FL 33431 561.445.1361 561.997.6224(fax) PRIVILEGE AND CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521 and is legally privileged. The contents of this e-mail message and any attachments are intended solely for the party or parties addressed and named in this message. This communication and all attachments, if any, are intended to be and to remain confidential, and it may be subject to the applicable attorney - client and or work product privileges. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, or if this message has been addressed to you in error, please immediately alert the sender by reply e-mail and then delete this message and its attachments. Do not deliver, distribute, or copy this message and or any attachments if you are not the intended recipient. Do not disclose the contents or take any action in reliance upon the information contained in this communication or any attachments. Although this E-mail and any attachments are believed to be free of any virus or other defect that might affect any computer system into which it is received and opened, it is the responsibility of the recipient to ensure that it is virus free and no responsibility is accepted by the sender for damage arising in any way from its use. Ê

MT

Marcia Tabak

Fri, Apr 26, 2013 4:58 PM

Are there any cases on the following? Landlord enters into contract to sell commercial strip center. Tenant signs an estoppel letter provided by this landlord for purposes of the sale, wherein tenant verifies he is current on the lease, there are no defaults, etc. Sale goes through and 3 months later is notified by original Landlord that they have discovered a past accounting error when they reconciled their books and now have determined tenant owes them an additional $2,000 that they were previously unaware of. Will this original landlord who furnished tenant with this estoppel letter and who benefited from its execution, which was ultimately relied on by the purchaser of the premises (and purchaser's lender) be successful in a suit against the tenant for failure to pay sums previously due under the lease? If you can point out any cases on point or guidance, it would be most appreciated.

Marcia Tabak

Are there any cases on the following? Landlord enters into contract to sell commercial strip center. Tenant signs an estoppel letter provided by this landlord for purposes of the sale, wherein tenant verifies he is current on the lease, there are no defaults, etc. Sale goes through and 3 months later is notified by original Landlord that they have discovered a past accounting error when they reconciled their books and now have determined tenant owes them an additional $2,000 that they were previously unaware of. Will this original landlord who furnished tenant with this estoppel letter and who benefited from its execution, which was ultimately relied on by the purchaser of the premises (and purchaser's lender) be successful in a suit against the tenant for failure to pay sums previously due under the lease? If you can point out any cases on point or guidance, it would be most appreciated. Marcia Tabak

HG

Haney, Gregory

Fri, Apr 26, 2013 5:17 PM

Can’t help with any cases, but that won’t stop me from piping up! I can’t imagine how a landlord would be estopped by a tenant’s own representations (and in this case, unilateral assertion of non-default), even if the landlord did provide a suggested form.

Gregory R. Haney
Attorney at Law
Shumaker, Loop & Kendrick LLP
Bank of America Plaza
101 East Kennedy Boulevard
Suite 2800
Tampa, FL 33602
813.229.7600
813.227.2277 direct
813.229.1660 fax
ghaney@slk-law.com
www.slk-law.com http://www.slk-law.com/

IRS Circular 230 Notice: We are required to advise you no person or entity may use any tax advice in this communication or any attachment to (i) avoid any penalty under federal tax law or (ii) promote, market or recommend any purchase, investment or other action.

Confidentiality Statement: This electronic message contains information from the law firm of Shumaker, Loop & Kendrick, LLP, and may be confidential or privileged. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient, be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this message is prohibited. If you have received this electronic message in error, please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail or telephone 800.444.6659.
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Marcia Tabak
Sent: Friday, April 26, 2013 12:58 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] estoppel letter

Are there any cases on the following? Landlord enters into contract to sell commercial strip center. Tenant signs an estoppel letter provided by this landlord for purposes of the sale, wherein tenant verifies he is current on the lease, there are no defaults, etc. Sale goes through and 3 months later is notified by original Landlord that they have discovered a past accounting error when they reconciled their books and now have determined tenant owes them an additional $2,000 that they were previously unaware of. Will this original landlord who furnished tenant with this estoppel letter and who benefited from its execution, which was ultimately relied on by the purchaser of the premises (and purchaser’s lender) be successful in a suit against the tenant for failure to pay sums previously due under the lease? If you can point out any cases on point or guidance, it would be most appreciated.

Marcia Tabak

Can’t help with any cases, but that won’t stop me from piping up! I can’t imagine how a landlord would be estopped by a tenant’s own representations (and in this case, unilateral assertion of non-default), even if the landlord did provide a suggested form. Gregory R. Haney Attorney at Law Shumaker, Loop & Kendrick LLP Bank of America Plaza 101 East Kennedy Boulevard Suite 2800 Tampa, FL 33602 813.229.7600 813.227.2277 direct 813.229.1660 fax ghaney@slk-law.com www.slk-law.com<http://www.slk-law.com/> ________________________________ IRS Circular 230 Notice: We are required to advise you no person or entity may use any tax advice in this communication or any attachment to (i) avoid any penalty under federal tax law or (ii) promote, market or recommend any purchase, investment or other action. Confidentiality Statement: This electronic message contains information from the law firm of Shumaker, Loop & Kendrick, LLP, and may be confidential or privileged. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient, be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this message is prohibited. If you have received this electronic message in error, please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail or telephone 800.444.6659. From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Marcia Tabak Sent: Friday, April 26, 2013 12:58 PM To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] estoppel letter Are there any cases on the following? Landlord enters into contract to sell commercial strip center. Tenant signs an estoppel letter provided by this landlord for purposes of the sale, wherein tenant verifies he is current on the lease, there are no defaults, etc. Sale goes through and 3 months later is notified by original Landlord that they have discovered a past accounting error when they reconciled their books and now have determined tenant owes them an additional $2,000 that they were previously unaware of. Will this original landlord who furnished tenant with this estoppel letter and who benefited from its execution, which was ultimately relied on by the purchaser of the premises (and purchaser’s lender) be successful in a suit against the tenant for failure to pay sums previously due under the lease? If you can point out any cases on point or guidance, it would be most appreciated. Marcia Tabak

ER

Eric.Rapkin (at) akerman.com

Fri, Apr 26, 2013 5:35 PM

I can't help with cases either, and I agree that the prior landlord isn't estopped by a tenant's estoppel, but I would also suggest to check the purchase and sale agreement between the former owner and current owner of the center, very often there's a provision for how rentals due for periods prior to the closing are to be collected (and it often allows the former owner to sue the tenant for damages for the past due rentals but not to sue for eviction).

V Cardhttp://www.akerman.com/bios/vcard.asp?id=574 | Biohttp://www.akerman.com/bios/bio.asp?id=574 | akerman.comhttp://www.akerman.com/574

[http://www.akerman.com/akermanlogo4.gif]

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE: The information contained in this transmission may be privileged and confidential, and is intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately reply to the sender that you have received this communication in error and then delete it. Thank you.

CIRCULAR 230 NOTICE: To comply with U.S. Treasury Department and IRS regulations, we are required to advise you that, unless expressly stated otherwise, any U.S. federal tax advice contained in this transmittal, is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, by any person for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties under the U.S. Internal Revenue Code, or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed in this e-mail or attachment.
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Haney, Gregory
Sent: Friday, April 26, 2013 1:18 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] estoppel letter

Can’t help with any cases, but that won’t stop me from piping up! I can’t imagine how a landlord would be estopped by a tenant’s own representations (and in this case, unilateral assertion of non-default), even if the landlord did provide a suggested form.

Gregory R. Haney
Attorney at Law
Shumaker, Loop & Kendrick LLP
Bank of America Plaza
101 East Kennedy Boulevard
Suite 2800
Tampa, FL 33602
813.229.7600
813.227.2277 direct
813.229.1660 fax
ghaney@slk-law.com mailto:ghaney@slk-law.com
www.slk-law.com http://www.slk-law.com/

IRS Circular 230 Notice: We are required to advise you no person or entity may use any tax advice in this communication or any attachment to (i) avoid any penalty under federal tax law or (ii) promote, market or recommend any purchase, investment or other action.

Confidentiality Statement: This electronic message contains information from the law firm of Shumaker, Loop & Kendrick, LLP, and may be confidential or privileged. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient, be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this message is prohibited. If you have received this electronic message in error, please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail or telephone 800.444.6659.
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org]mailto:[mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Marcia Tabak
Sent: Friday, April 26, 2013 12:58 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] estoppel letter

Are there any cases on the following? Landlord enters into contract to sell commercial strip center. Tenant signs an estoppel letter provided by this landlord for purposes of the sale, wherein tenant verifies he is current on the lease, there are no defaults, etc. Sale goes through and 3 months later is notified by original Landlord that they have discovered a past accounting error when they reconciled their books and now have determined tenant owes them an additional $2,000 that they were previously unaware of. Will this original landlord who furnished tenant with this estoppel letter and who benefited from its execution, which was ultimately relied on by the purchaser of the premises (and purchaser’s lender) be successful in a suit against the tenant for failure to pay sums previously due under the lease? If you can point out any cases on point or guidance, it would be most appreciated.

Marcia Tabak

I can't help with cases either, and I agree that the prior landlord isn't estopped by a tenant's estoppel, but I would also suggest to check the purchase and sale agreement between the former owner and current owner of the center, very often there's a provision for how rentals due for periods prior to the closing are to be collected (and it often allows the former owner to sue the tenant for damages for the past due rentals but not to sue for eviction). Eric D. Rapkin Akerman Senterfitt | 350 East Las Olas Boulevard | Suite 1600 | Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Dir: 954.759.8962 | Main: 954.463.2700 | Cell: 305.343.6129 | Fax: 954.847.5350 eric.rapkin@akerman.com V Card<http://www.akerman.com/bios/vcard.asp?id=574> | Bio<http://www.akerman.com/bios/bio.asp?id=574> | akerman.com<http://www.akerman.com/574> [http://www.akerman.com/akermanlogo4.gif] CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE: The information contained in this transmission may be privileged and confidential, and is intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately reply to the sender that you have received this communication in error and then delete it. Thank you. CIRCULAR 230 NOTICE: To comply with U.S. Treasury Department and IRS regulations, we are required to advise you that, unless expressly stated otherwise, any U.S. federal tax advice contained in this transmittal, is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, by any person for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties under the U.S. Internal Revenue Code, or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed in this e-mail or attachment. From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Haney, Gregory Sent: Friday, April 26, 2013 1:18 PM To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] estoppel letter Can’t help with any cases, but that won’t stop me from piping up! I can’t imagine how a landlord would be estopped by a tenant’s own representations (and in this case, unilateral assertion of non-default), even if the landlord did provide a suggested form. Gregory R. Haney Attorney at Law Shumaker, Loop & Kendrick LLP Bank of America Plaza 101 East Kennedy Boulevard Suite 2800 Tampa, FL 33602 813.229.7600 813.227.2277 direct 813.229.1660 fax ghaney@slk-law.com<mailto:ghaney@slk-law.com> www.slk-law.com<http://www.slk-law.com/> ________________________________ IRS Circular 230 Notice: We are required to advise you no person or entity may use any tax advice in this communication or any attachment to (i) avoid any penalty under federal tax law or (ii) promote, market or recommend any purchase, investment or other action. Confidentiality Statement: This electronic message contains information from the law firm of Shumaker, Loop & Kendrick, LLP, and may be confidential or privileged. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient, be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this message is prohibited. If you have received this electronic message in error, please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail or telephone 800.444.6659. From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org<mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org> [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org]<mailto:[mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org]> On Behalf Of Marcia Tabak Sent: Friday, April 26, 2013 12:58 PM To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] estoppel letter Are there any cases on the following? Landlord enters into contract to sell commercial strip center. Tenant signs an estoppel letter provided by this landlord for purposes of the sale, wherein tenant verifies he is current on the lease, there are no defaults, etc. Sale goes through and 3 months later is notified by original Landlord that they have discovered a past accounting error when they reconciled their books and now have determined tenant owes them an additional $2,000 that they were previously unaware of. Will this original landlord who furnished tenant with this estoppel letter and who benefited from its execution, which was ultimately relied on by the purchaser of the premises (and purchaser’s lender) be successful in a suit against the tenant for failure to pay sums previously due under the lease? If you can point out any cases on point or guidance, it would be most appreciated. Marcia Tabak

EJ

Eric Jacobs

Fri, Apr 26, 2013 7:38 PM

The leases were likely assigned so unless landlord can force new landlord to do it. Im not sure he has standing to bring suit. Standing must be present at time of suit.

Sent from my iphone

On Apr 26, 2013, at 12:58 PM, "Marcia Tabak" <MARCIAT@floridarealtors.org mailto:MARCIAT@floridarealtors.org> wrote:

Are there any cases on the following? Landlord enters into contract to sell commercial strip center. Tenant signs an estoppel letter provided by this landlord for purposes of the sale, wherein tenant verifies he is current on the lease, there are no defaults, etc. Sale goes through and 3 months later is notified by original Landlord that they have discovered a past accounting error when they reconciled their books and now have determined tenant owes them an additional $2,000 that they were previously unaware of. Will this original landlord who furnished tenant with this estoppel letter and who benefited from its execution, which was ultimately relied on by the purchaser of the premises (and purchaser’s lender) be successful in a suit against the tenant for failure to pay sums previously due under the lease? If you can point out any cases on point or guidance, it would be most appreciated.

Marcia Tabak

landten mailing list
landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org mailto:landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten

The leases were likely assigned so unless landlord can force new landlord to do it. Im not sure he has standing to bring suit. Standing must be present at time of suit. Sent from my iphone On Apr 26, 2013, at 12:58 PM, "Marcia Tabak" <MARCIAT@floridarealtors.org<mailto:MARCIAT@floridarealtors.org>> wrote: Are there any cases on the following? Landlord enters into contract to sell commercial strip center. Tenant signs an estoppel letter provided by this landlord for purposes of the sale, wherein tenant verifies he is current on the lease, there are no defaults, etc. Sale goes through and 3 months later is notified by original Landlord that they have discovered a past accounting error when they reconciled their books and now have determined tenant owes them an additional $2,000 that they were previously unaware of. Will this original landlord who furnished tenant with this estoppel letter and who benefited from its execution, which was ultimately relied on by the purchaser of the premises (and purchaser’s lender) be successful in a suit against the tenant for failure to pay sums previously due under the lease? If you can point out any cases on point or guidance, it would be most appreciated. Marcia Tabak _______________________________________________ landten mailing list landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org<mailto:landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org> http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten

landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org

[RPPTL LandTen] Commercial eviction