Definitions and Statutes
- Q: What section of the Florida Statutes applies to commercial landlord-tenant relationships?
- Q: What is a term for years tenancy?
- Q: What is a tenancy at will?
- Q: What is a tenancy at sufferance?
- Q: What is apparent authority?
- Q: Under Florida law, is an oral lease enforceable?
- Q: What should be included in a written commercial lease?
- Q: How should a corporation “sign” a lease?
- Q: What rules should be followed in construing or interpreting a lease?
Duties of the Parties & Landlord Liability
- Q: Is a tenant liable for breach of contract for “going dark?”
- Q: What is a covenant of continuous operation?
- Q: Describe the landlord’s duty to deliver possession of the premises.
- Q: What is the landlord’s covenant of quiet enjoyment?
- Q: What happens if the landlord breaches the covenant of quiet enjoyment?
- Q: Is a landlord liable for injuries occurring on the leased premises?
- Q: Does a landlord have a duty to protect against foreseeable criminal activity?
- Q: Can a commercial landlord protect itself from liability for its own negligence?
- Q: In general, what are the duties and obligations of the tenant?
Removal Actions, Rights and Remedies
- Q: Does a tenant have recourse against a landlord that removes the tenant without legal process?
- Q: What type of written notice is required to be served by the landlord prior to bringing a removal action?
- Q: What is “summary procedure” in the context of a removal action?
- Q: If a tenant is wrongfully evicted may he or she sue for damages, and, if so, how are they measured?
- Q: Is the tenant required to pay rent into the court registry in a removal action?
- Q: What if the tenant contests the amount that is due to be paid into the court registry?
- Q: What if the tenant does not or cannot pay rent into the court registry in a removal action?
- Q: What is waste?
- Q: What are the landlord’s remedies when a tenant has committed waste to the premises?
- Q: What are the landlord’s remedies when the tenant has held over after the expiration of the term of the lease?
- Q: May a landlord demand double rent from a tenant who holds over after the end of the term?
- Q: Is “self-help” entry allowed by the landlord in an eviction action?
- Q: When may a tenant bring an action for wrongful eviction?
- Q: What is a constructive eviction?
Liens and Distress Actions
A: Florida landlord tenant law is found in Florida Statutes, Chapter 83, and consists of three parts. Part I discusses nonresidential or commercial tenancies. Part II discusses residential tenancies and Part III discusses self-service storage space.
Source: Fla. Stat. § 83.001, et seq. (2012).
A: A term for years tenancy has a certain and definite duration, meaning a fixed term. A term for years tenancy is created by a written lease that expresses a term that is certain as to commencement and as to specific maximum duration. If the language of the lease contract does not express a certain term, a tenancy at will is created.
Source: Ehrlich v. Barbatsis Holding Co., 63 So. 2d 911, 913 (Fla. 1953).
A: A tenancy at will is a tenancy with durational insecurity, meaning for no fixed term. The term of a tenancy at will is determined by the period of payment, and the term is automatically renewed for successive periods. Such tenancy shall be from year to year, or quarter to quarter, or month to month, or week to week, to be determined by the periods at which the rent is payable. If the rent is payable weekly, then the tenancy shall be from week to week; if payable monthly, then from month to month; if payable quarterly, then from quarter to quarter; if payable yearly, then from year to year. The usual rights and duties of landlord and tenant exist, but either party may terminate the lease at any time by giving proper notice. A tenancy created by a written instrument with an unlimited term is considered a tenancy at will.
Source: Fla. Stat. §§ 83.01, 83.02 (2012).
A: A tenancy at sufferance is created by a wrongful holdover tenant. A tenancy at sufferance is only created when there is a written instrument, a limited term that has expired, and a holdover of possession by the tenant without a written renewal of the lease. The mere payment or acceptance of rent shall not be construed to be a renewal of the term, but if the landlord gives written consent to continue a holdover, the tenancy becomes one at will. If the parties agree to a new oral lease, there is no tenancy at sufferance. Pursuant to Section 83.06, Florida Statutes, a landlord may charge double rent when a tenant refuses to relinquish possession of the premises at expiration of the term. Further, a landlord still has the right to bring an action against a holdover tenant for the use and occupation of the premises.
Source: Fla. Stat. §§ 83.04, 83.06, and 83.07 (2012).
A: Yes, as a tenancy at will. However, Florida’s Statute of Frauds law provides that a lease for longer than one year must be in writing to be enforceable. Nonetheless, an oral lease that is payable monthly is a month-to-month tenancy at will, and, thus, does not violate the Statute of Frauds if it continues in effect for more than a year.
Source: Fla. Stat. § 83.01 (2012), Mangum v. Susser, 764 So. 2d 653, 655 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000).
A: First of all, a commercial lease should be written in plain and simple language, so all persons who are associated with the lease will understand the rights and obligations created by the lease. As to what should be included in a written commercial lease, it should include, at a minimum, the names of the parties, a specific description of the property, the term of the lease, a provision for rent payment, words of mutual agreement indicating the intent of both parties to create a lease contract, and the signatures of the parties. Further, a lease for more than one year should be signed in the presence of two subscribing witnesses. These witnesses do not need to be “disinterested,” meaning the witnesses may have some interest in the lease. For an extensive list of other subjects that should be considered when drafting a commercial lease see §8.02, Florida Commercial Landlord Tenant Law (Nicholas C. Glover, supplemented by Douglas MacGregor; LexisNexis Matthew Bender).
Source: Fla. Stat. § 689.01 (2012); Skyline Outdoor Communs., Inc. v. James, 903 So.2d 997 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005).
A: Section 692.01, Florida Statutes provides that a corporation may execute lease agreements by affixing the corporate seal and having it signed by its president or any vice president or chief executive officer. Thus, a commercial lease is void and unenforceable against the corporate tenant if it fails in this regard, except that it may be enforceable against a corporation if it was signed by a person with apparent authority. Further, commercial leases must comply with the two-witness requirement of Section 689.01, Florida Statutes.
Source: Fla. Stat. § 692.01 (2012); Radison Props., Inc. v. Flamingo Groves, Inc., 767 So. 2d 587 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000); Ocean Bank of Miami v. INV-UNI Inv. Corp., 599 So. 2d 694 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1992), rev. denied 606 So. 2d 1165 (Fla. 1992); Skylake Ins. Agency, Inc. v. NMB Plaza, LLC, 23 So. 3d 175 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009).
A: The Florida Supreme Court stated that the principle of apparent authority embraces the following three elements: 1) a representation by the principal, 2) reliance on that representation by a third person, and 3) a change of position by the third person in reliance on the representation. Clearly, the reliance of a third party on the “apparent authority” of a principal’s agent must be reasonable and rest in the actions of or appearances created by the principal, and “not by agents who often ingeniously create an appearance of authority by their own acts.”
Source: Security Union Title Ins. Co. v. Citibank (Florida), N.A., 715 So. 2d 973, 974-75 (Fla. 1st DCA) rev. dismissed, 728 So. 2d 200 (Fla. 1998).
A: The general rules of contract construction apply to the construction of a Florida commercial lease contract. A lease agreement must be construed to give effect to the parties’ intent. Every contract provision should be given meaning and effect and the deliberate distribution of benefits and burdens by the parties should not be disturbed by the court. The individual terms of a lease contract should be considered as a whole and in relation to one another, and not in isolation. When possible, provisions that apparently conflict should be construed so they do not conflict. However, when two clauses of a lease are adverse to each other and cannot stand together the first remains and the latter fails. A lease provision that specifically addresses a subject takes precedence over a general provision concerning that subject. The intention of the parties is to be obtained from the unambiguous terms of the contract, not from what may have existed in the minds of the parties but was not reflected in the written lease. Courts will not interpret contracts in a manner that extends or enlarges the obligations of a contracting party beyond the plain meaning of the language used in the contract itself.
Source: Stemmler v. Moon Jewelry Co., 139 So. 2d 150 (Fla. 1st DCA 1962); Jerry’s, Inc. v. Miami, 591 So. 2d 1000 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991); Meyer v. Caribbean Interiors, 435 So. 2d 936 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); Petrou v. Wilder, 557 So. 2d 617, 618 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990); Freundlich v. Lassiter, 666 So. 2d 164 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995); Sisco v. Rotenberg, 104 So. 2d 365, 368 (Fla. 1958); Leesburg Cmty. Cancer Ctr. v. Leesburg Reg’l Med. Ctr., Inc., 972 So. 2d 203, 207 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007).
A: Yes, in some circumstances. A tenant will be liable to the landlord for “going dark” if the lease expressly or impliedly includes a covenant of continuous operation. Assuming there is no such express provision in the lease, the court must determine, based on the entirety of the facts and circumstances surrounding the lease, whether the parties intended it to include an implied covenant of continuous operation. Possibly the most important factor is whether the rental to be paid is based solely on a percentage of the sales or profits generated by the business. If the court finds that there was no such intent, the tenant’s “going dark” will not be deemed a breach of the lease, provided it continues to timely pay rent.
Source: Lincoln Tower Corp. v. Richter’s Jewelry Co., 12 So. 2d 452 (Fla. 1943); Mayfair Operating Corp. v. Bessemer Properties, Inc., 150 Fla. 132, 136 (Fla. 1942); Diltz v. J & M Corp., 381 So. 2d 272 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980); Stemmler v. Moon Jewelry Company, Inc., 139 So. 2d 150 (Fla. 1st DCA 1962); Jerrico, Inc. v. Wash. Nat’l Ins. Co., 400 So. 2d 1316, 1318 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981).
A: A covenant of continuous operation is an obligation on the part of the tenant to continue to operate the business at the leased premises. This obligation is especially important where the rent is tied in some way to the tenant’s business, such as being based on tenant’s gross sales or profits. This covenant is also important in the context of anchor tenants that generate substantial traffic to the premises, thereby increasing the sales of the other tenants. A covenant of continuous operation is breached when the tenant discontinues operations (“goes dark”) at the leased premises, even though it continues to pay rent.
Source: 15 Williston on Contracts § 48:4 (4th ed.)
A: The landlord has an implied duty to give possession to the tenant at the time stated in the lease contract. In other words, the landlord is bound to permit the tenant to take possession at the commencement of the term and to interpose no obstacle thereto. Delivery of a lease authorizes the tenant to take possession according to the terms of the instrument. During the term of the lease, the tenant in possession is for all practical purposes the owner of the property, having the right of possession, dominion, control, and use thereof, in the absence of a statute affecting or limiting such rights. Where the lessor fails to give possession, the lessee may maintain an appropriate action against the lessor, such as an action for damages or an action for possession. In the context of new construction, an implied warranty or covenant arises that the completed structure will be suitable for the lessee’s intended use.
Source: 52A C.J.S. Landlord & Tenant §§ 724, 731 (2012); Levitz Furniture Co. of E. Region v. Cont’l Equities, 411 So. 2d 221, 223 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982).
A: A covenant of quiet enjoyment made by the landlord assures the tenant that the landlord’s title is not defective and that the tenant’s possession will not be disturbed. It protects the tenants against the acts or hindrances of the landlord. As the name suggests, it assures that the tenant shall have legal quiet and peaceable possession and enjoyment of the leased premises. The landlord’s duty to provide quiet enjoyment also applies to a subtenant. A covenant of quiet enjoyment is implied in the lease, whether written or oral. However, the parties may expressly exclude the implication of a covenant for quiet enjoyment.
Source: 52A C.J.S. Landlord & Tenant § 768 (2012); Blum v. Kohlmeyer & Co., 363 So. 2d 1129 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978).
Q: What happens if the landlord breaches the covenant of quiet enjoyment?
A: A tenant may bring an action for breach of the covenant of quiet enjoyment against the landlord for interference with the use and enjoyment of the rented property. A breach of the covenant of quiet enjoyment may entitle the tenant to be discharged from his obligations under the lease; the tenant no longer has to pay rent. An express covenant of quiet enjoyment may provide that the landlord shall pay damages to the tenant if the beneficial enjoyment of the premises is interrupted by a failure in the landlord’s title.
Source: 52A C.J.S. Landlord & Tenant §§ 777 (2012).
A: Generally, a landlord is not liable for injuries occurring on the leased premises. However, a landlord may be liable for injuries if the condition causing the injury is:
- a violation of law;
- a pre-existing defect;
- an inherent danger; or
- the landlord undertakes a covenant to repair.
When there has been a violation of law by the landlord, not even an exculpatory clause will insulate the landlord from liability. See John’s Pass Seafood Co. v. Weber, 369 So. 2d 616 (Fla. 2d DCA 1969) (finding that landlord is not permitted to exculpate himself from liability to a tenant for fire damage which occurred as a result of the landlord’s failure to provide firefighting equipment on leased dock).
A pre-existing defect in a structure or premises will generally lead to a landlord’s liability for injuries to strangers that are caused by that defect. The landlord has a duty to warn any guests of a tenant against known dangers the licensee is not likely to discover and to refrain from wanton negligence or willful misconduct. However, when a tenant is in complete control of the premises and a defect comes into existence during the term of the lease, or a dangerous condition is the direct result of the tenant’s use of the premises, a landlord will not normally be liable for injuries to an invitee of the tenant. See Lich v. N.C.J. Inv. Co.,728 So. 2d 1191 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999) (landlord was not found liable when a window that broke and injured tenant’s employee had operated properly for one year and was installed prior to landlord’s purchase of the building.)
A landlord who assumes a duty to repair or to improve the rented premises is held to a standard of reasonable care in making the repairs or improvements. A landlord will be liable for injuries caused by the negligence of his own unskillful work or the work of his servants or employees in making the repairs or in leaving the premises in an unsafe condition, even if the repairs are undertaken voluntarily.
A: Yes, landlords may have a duty to protect against foreseeable criminal activity. This duty may be limited to harm occurring on premises under the direct control of the landlord. For instance, this duty extends to common areas within the landlord’s control.
Source: McVicker v. Kolb, 839 So. 2d 768, 769 (Fla. 4thDCA 2003)
A: Yes. A commercial landlord may avoid liability for its own negligence by inserting a specific exculpatory clause, with clear terms, in the lease contract. Exculpatory clauses that limit or exempt liability for negligence are disfavored, but are enforceable in Florida courts.
Source: University Plaza Shopping Center, Inc. v. Stewart, 272 So. 2d 507, 511 (Fla. 1973)
A: The tenant’s primary duty is the payment of rent. The tenant also has the duty to surrender the premises at the termination of the lease agreement. Additionally, the tenant has a duty not to commit waste. When the lease term begins, the tenant has the right to occupy and to use the premises described in the lease. However, in the absence of a specific provision or in the absence of waste, the tenant has no obligation to occupy or use, or to continue to use the demised premises for a particular purpose, even if both parties expected and intended a particular purpose.
A: Waste is the abusive or destructive use of property by someone who is in rightful possession of the property. Waste implies neglect or misconduct that results in material damage but does not include the ordinary depreciation of property from time and normal use. Implicit in the landlord-tenant relationship is the obligation on the part of the tenant not to commit waste to the leased premises.
Source: Black’s Law Dictionary 1425 (5th ed. 1979); Stegeman v. Burger Chef Sys., Inc., 374 So. 2d 1130, 1131 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979).
Q: What are the landlord’s remedies when a tenant has committed waste to the premises?
A: When a landlord is confronted with a tenant’s present act of waste, the landlord may seek an injunction to restrain the tenant from committing further waste. After waste has been committed by the tenant, a landlord may bring an action in damages for waste committed by the tenant that caused injury to the landlord’s future interest in the property.
Source: Rogers v. Martin, 87 Fla. 204, 208 (Fla. 1924); Stephenson v. National Bank of Winter Haven, 92 Fla. 347, 353 (Fla. 1926).
A: When a tenant holds over beyond the term of his tenancy, the landlord has the following legal remedies: (1) demanding double rent; (2) demanding a specific amount of continuing rent; or (3) initiating a removal action, i.e. suing for the possession of the property plus damages, including special damages for loss of the property’s use.
Source: Lincoln Oldsmobile v. Branch, 574 So. 2d 1111, 1113 (Fla. 2nd DCA 1990); Fla. Stat. §§ 83.20-83.251 (2012).
A: Yes. The landlord has the statutory right to demand double rent at the end of the month, or in the same proportion for a longer or shorter time by distress, from a tenant who holds over willfully and without title after the end of the term. However, a tenant is probably not liable for double rent if he holds over with a reasonable good faith claim of a right to possession. The statute should be construed in favor of tenant and against the landlord. For this reason, the obligation to pay double rent has been held to begin on the day of the demand and is not retroactive to the date of the holdover. In order for a landlord to collect double rent as authorized by Florida Statute Section 83.06, the landlord must first give notice to the tenant of his intention to demand double rent. For example, the term of a lease ended on March 31, but the tenant continued their possession of the property. The landlord demanded double rent on April 30. Assuming the landlord gave the tenant notice of his intention to demand double rent, the day that double rent is calculated is April 30, the day of the demand.
Source: Fla. Stat. § 83.06 (2012); Greentree Amusement Arcade v. Greenacres Dev. Corp., 401 So. 2d 915, 917 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981); Painter v. Groveland, 79 So. 2d 765, 768 (Fla. 1955); Lincoln Oldsmobile v. Branch, 574 So. 2d 1111, 1113 (Fla. 2nd DCA 1990).
A: No, in most circumstances. In 1983, the Florida Legislature made substantial changes to Florida Statutes Section 83.05, taking away the landlord’s right to immediate re-entry and possession, following a tenant’s rent default. Now, Section 83.05, Florida Statutes, only provides that the landlord shall recover possession of the rented premises only (1) under Section 83.20 (discussing holdover without permission; holdover after default, and; holdover after failing to cure a material breach) or other civil possessory action, (2) when the tenant surrenders possession of the rented premises to the landlord, or (3) when the tenant abandons the rented premises.
Source: Fla. Stat. §§ 83.05 and 83.20 (2012).
A: An action for wrongful eviction is proper when a landlord’s wrongful act deprives a tenant of possession of the rented premises or disturbs a tenant’s beneficial enjoyment so as to cause the tenant to abandon the premises. A wrongful eviction may be either actual or constructive. Generally, the tenant must abandon the premises in order to sue the landlord for wrongful eviction.
Source: Richards v. Dodge, 150 So. 2d 477, 481 (Fla. 2nd DCA 1963).
A: A constructive eviction results from the intended disturbance by the landlord or his agent that interferes with the tenant’s possession and either renders the premises unfit for the purpose rented, or deprives the tenant of his beneficial enjoyment of the premises. Eviction may occur from a landlord’s direct act of interference, from an interference with the tenant’s access to the rented premises, or from a third party’s interference. A constructive eviction has the effect of essentially depriving the tenant of the beneficial enjoyment of the leased premises as where they are rendered unsafe, unfit, or unsuitable for occupancy in whole or in substantial part for the purposes for which leased.
Source: Ralston, Inc. v. Miller, 357 So. 2d 1066, 1069 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978).
A: Possibly. If the landlord takes possession from the tenant without legal process, the tenant may bring an action for unlawful entry and detainer. It is irrelevant to such action that the tenant’s possession was wrongful. The action is designed to compel the party claiming rightful possession to use legal channels in lieu of self-help measures.
Source: Fla. Stat. § 82.01, et seq (2012).
A: No notice is required where tenant holds over and continues in the possession of the demised premises, or any part thereof, after the expiration of the lease term, without the permission of the landlord. Three days’ notice is required for a tenant that defaults in the payment of rent. Fifteen days’ notice is required for a tenant that materially breaches the lease or oral agreement, other than nonpayment of rent.
Source: Fla. Stat. § 83.20 (2012).
A: A removal action is summary in nature. The purpose of a removal action is to give the landlord fast relief when the tenant is in default under the rent provisions of the contract. Florida landlord and tenant law entitles the landlord to summary procedure under Florida Statutes Chapter 51. A summary removal complaint must contain the matters required by the removal statute: Florida Statutes, Section 51.011(1). The summary removal complaint should be filed in the county court where the premises is located. The tenant must answer the complaint within five days after receiving service of process, excluding any intervening Saturdays or Sundays, or legal holidays. Generally, default is improper when a party has filed a responsive pleading or otherwise defended before entry of default. All defenses of law or fact must be contained in the tenant’s answer. The tenant may incorporate a counterclaim into his answer, thereby requiring the landlord to serve an answer to the counterclaim within five days of receiving service of the tenant’s answer. No other pleadings are permitted in summary procedure.
Source: Fla. Stat. § 83.21 (2012); Fla. Stat. § 51.011(1) (2012); Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.090(a).
A: Yes, for general damages and sometimes for lost profits, relocation expenses, and punitive damages. General damages are usually determined by finding the difference, if any, between the market value of the remainder of the term and the rent value of the remainder of the term. The tenant may also be entitled to lost profits and relocation expenses if the tenant is unable to find a comparable location to rent within the immediate area for the same rental amount. When a landlord’s wrongful eviction ends a tenant’s business, the tenant may recover damages that include compensation for injury to business, including a loss of future profits if future profits can be ascertained within a reasonable degree of certainty. Punitive damages may be claimed if the landlord’s behavior that causes the eviction is malicious and wanton in nature, or constitutes fraud, gross negligence or oppression.
Source: Ardell v. Milner, 166 So. 2d 714, 716 (Fla. 3d DCA 1964); Young v. Cobbs, 83 So. 2d 417, 420 (Fla. 1955).
A: Yes. Section 83.232, Florida Statutes, requires that in any removal action, the tenant must pay into the court registry the amount alleged in the complaint and any rent accrued during the pendency of the action, unless the tenant has interposed a defense of payment or satisfaction of the rent in the amount the complaint alleges as unpaid. The court, on its own motion, shall notify the tenant of the requirement that rent be paid into the court registry by order, which shall be issued immediately upon filing of the tenant’s initial pleading, motion, or other paper. The filing of a counterclaim for money damages does not relieve the tenant from depositing rent due into the registry of the court. If the landlord is in actual danger of loss of the premises or other hardship resulting from the loss of rental income from the premises, the landlord may apply to the court for disbursement of all or part of the funds so held in the court registry.
Source: Fla. Stat. § 83.232 (2012).
A: If the tenant contests the amount that is due to be paid into the court registry, the tenant must pay the amount determined by the court. Generally, the landlord must prove the amount the amount that is due. The court will issue an order for the defendant to pay a certain amount due.
Source: Fla. Stat. § 83.232 (2012).
A: A tenant’s failure to pay rent into the court registry is cause for immediate default in favor of the landlord. Section 83.232, Florida Statutes, provides that “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. In such case, the landlord is entitled to an immediate default for possession without further notice or hearing thereon.” The clear language of the statute precludes any procedure in which a trial court may excuse non-compliance with a prior order.
Source: Fla. Stat. § 83.232 (2012).
A: Section 83.08, Florida Statutes, provides that a landlord has a lien for unpaid rent upon the tenant’s personal property. The lien is upon all agricultural products raised on the rented property, upon all other property of the tenant “usually kept on the premises,” and upon “all other property” of the tenant. Certain property of the tenant is exempt from distress and sale to enforce the landlord’s lien for rent. Exempt property in the commercial setting includes “beds, bedclothes and wearing apparel.”
Source: Fla. Stat. §§ 83.08 and 83.09 (2012).
Q: How is the landlord’s lien for rent enforced?
A: Enforcing the landlord’s lien for rent begins with filing a distress for rent complaint, which initiates a distress for rent proceeding. Distress proceedings are summary in nature and informal. A distress writ shall be issued by a judge of the court which has jurisdiction of the amount claimed. The remedy of distress for rent only applies to commercial tenancies, and is abolished with regard to residential tenancies.
Source: Fla. Stat. §§ 83.11, 83.12, and 713.691 (2012).
A: The distress for rent complaint must be verified, and it must state the name of the tenant and his relation to the landlord, facts showing how the rent obligation arose, the amount or quality and value of the rent due, and whether the rent is payable in money, farm products or another form of consideration. It must be filed in the court that has jurisdiction for the amount claimed in the county where the leased premise is located.
Source: Fla. Stat. § 83.11 (2012).
A: Before a judge can issue a distress writ the landlord must file a bond with surety to be approved by the court clerk, and payable to the tenant in at least double the amount demanded; or, if property, in double the value of the property sought to be levied on. The bond should be conditioned to pay all costs and damages which the tenant sustains if the landlord institutes an improper distress proceeding.
Source: Fla. Stat. § 83.12 (2012).
A: A distress writ is issued by the judge in a distress for rent proceeding, once the landlord files its distress for rent complaint and distress bond. The writ enjoins the tenant from damaging, disposing of, secreting or removing from the leased premises any property subject to the distress writ, from the time the distress writ is served to the tenant until the sheriff levies on the property, the writ is vacated or the court orders otherwise. A tenant may be punished with contempt of court if he violates the distress writ. If the tenant does not file a motion for the dissolution of the distress writ under Section 83.15, Florida Statutes, before the time for answering the complaint has expired, the sheriff shall seize the property liable to distress.
Source: Fla. Stat. § 83.12 (2012).
Information and Source reference for this webpage is courtesy of Florida Commercial Landlord Tenant Law (Nicholas C. Glover, supplemented by Douglas MacGregor; LexisNexis Matthew Bender) and Florida Statutes Chapter 83.