Casey v. Picinich

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Casey v. Picinich

573 So. 2d 76, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 9741, 1990 WL 211735

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedDecember 28, 1990

DocketNo. 89-3248

StatusPublished

This text of 573 So. 2d 76 (Casey v. Picinich) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Casey v. Picinich, 573 So. 2d 76, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 9741, 1990 WL 211735 (Fla. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

Opinions

PER CURIAM.

We affirm as to all issues on appeal, except one. Appellees have conceded that appellant is entitled to $54.38 as interest earned on his security deposit and $25 from the portion of the security deposit retained by them. In addition, we find that appellant is entitled to another $20, the balance of the retained security deposit. Appellees’ untimely notice forfeited their right to impose any claim upon appellant’s security deposit. § 83.49(3)(a), Fla.Stat. (1987).

Therefore, we reverse and remand with directions to enter judgment in favor of appellant in the amount of ninety-nine dollars and thirty-eight cents ($99.38) and the amount of his apportioned costs, if any.

STONE and GARRETT, JJ., concur. LETTS, J., dissents in part with opinion.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

We affirm as to all issues on appeal, except one. Appellees have conceded that appellant is entitled to $54.38 as interest earned on his security deposit and $25 from the portion of the security deposit retained by them. In addition, we find that appellant is entitled to another $20, the balance of the retained security deposit. Appellees’ untimely notice forfeited their right to impose any claim upon appellant’s security deposit. § 83.49(3)(a), Fla.Stat. (1987).

Therefore, we reverse and remand with directions to enter judgment in favor of appellant in the amount of ninety-nine dollars and thirty-eight cents ($99.38) and the amount of his apportioned costs, if any.

STONE and GARRETT, JJ., concur. LETTS, J., dissents in part with opinion.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

573 So. 2d 76, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 9741, 1990 WL 211735, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/casey-v-picinich-fladistctapp-1990.