Is anyone aware of any case law that will support the contention that residential property subject to a residential lease that is exclusively used to operate business and no one actually resides on the property is subject to part 1 of chapter 83 and not part 2? These are my basic facts. Landlord and tenant enter into residential lease for residential property. Tenant uses property to operate business and never resides on the property. Lease is terminated, however, utilities were shut off early (10 days prior to tenant vacating). Tenant now claims self-help and wants 3 months' rent. Presiding judge is inclined to rule against tenant on self-help claim based on the fact that although property is residential and lease appears to be residential, this is actually a business lease and tenancy is governed by part1 and not part 2 of chapter 83. Thank you Albert Alberto M. Cardet, P.A. 1330 Coral Way #301 Miami FL 33145 305-403-7783 305-403-7824 (fax)

I believe Part I is the better choice. Here is the cite to a case that is not on point but the court's statutory reference is to part I. Seymour v Adams, 638 So. 2d 1044, Fla. 5th DCA 1994) Dennis, Dennis A. Chen, Esq. Chen Law Firm, PA 5401 S. Kirkman Rd., Ste. 310 Orlando, Florida 32819 Tel: (407) 392-1872 Fax: 1-866-571-3421 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 Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 2:41 PM, Alberto MCardet <acardet@justice.com>wrote: > Is anyone aware of any case law that will support the contention that > residential property subject to a residential lease that is exclusively > used to operate business and no one actually resides on the property is > subject to part 1 of chapter 83 and not part 2?**** > > ** ** > > These are my basic facts.**** > > ** ** > > Landlord and tenant enter into residential lease for residential > property. Tenant uses property to operate business and never resides on > the property. Lease is terminated, however, utilities were shut off early > (10 days prior to tenant vacating). Tenant now claims self-help and wants > 3 months’ rent. Presiding judge is inclined to rule against tenant on > self-help claim based on the fact that although property is residential and > lease appears to be residential, this is actually a business lease and > tenancy is governed by part1 and not part 2 of chapter 83.**** > > ** ** > > Thank you**** > > ** ** > > Albert**** > > ** ** > > Alberto M. Cardet, P.A.**** > > 1330 Coral Way #301**** > > Miami FL 33145**** > > 305-403-7783**** > > 305-403-7824 (fax)**** > > ** ** > > _______________________________________________ > landten mailing list > landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org > http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten >

Thank you Alberto M. Cardet, P.A. 1330 Coral Way #301 Miami FL 33145 305-403-7783 On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 3:25 PM, Dennis Chen <dennis@chenlaw.net> wrote: > I believe Part I is the better choice. Here is the cite to a case that is > not on point but the court's statutory reference is to part I. Seymour v > Adams, 638 So. 2d 1044, Fla. 5th DCA 1994) > > Dennis, > > > Dennis A. Chen, Esq. > Chen Law Firm, PA > 5401 S. Kirkman Rd., Ste. 310 > Orlando, Florida 32819 > Tel: (407) 392-1872 > Fax: 1-866-571-3421 > 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 Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 2:41 PM, Alberto MCardet <acardet@justice.com>wrote: > >> Is anyone aware of any case law that will support the contention that >> residential property subject to a residential lease that is exclusively >> used to operate business and no one actually resides on the property is >> subject to part 1 of chapter 83 and not part 2?**** >> >> ** ** >> >> These are my basic facts.**** >> >> ** ** >> >> Landlord and tenant enter into residential lease for residential >> property. Tenant uses property to operate business and never resides on >> the property. Lease is terminated, however, utilities were shut off early >> (10 days prior to tenant vacating). Tenant now claims self-help and wants >> 3 months’ rent. Presiding judge is inclined to rule against tenant on >> self-help claim based on the fact that although property is residential and >> lease appears to be residential, this is actually a business lease and >> tenancy is governed by part1 and not part 2 of chapter 83.**** >> >> ** ** >> >> Thank you**** >> >> ** ** >> >> Albert**** >> >> ** ** >> >> Alberto M. Cardet, P.A.**** >> >> 1330 Coral Way #301**** >> >> Miami FL 33145**** >> >> 305-403-7783**** >> >> 305-403-7824 (fax)**** >> >> ** ** >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 >