Chartier v. Sherman

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Chartier v. Sherman

672 So. 2d 604, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 4308, 1996 WL 194349

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedApril 24, 1996

DocketNo. 96-463

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 672 So. 2d 604 (Chartier v. Sherman) 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

Chartier v. Sherman, 672 So. 2d 604, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 4308, 1996 WL 194349 (Fla. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

TMs case comes before tMs court on a petition for common law certiorari to review a decision of the circuit court acting in its appellate capacity. The underlying action involves a commercial lease. During the pendency of a suit for possession brought by Sherman, the landlord, he moved for payment of rent pursuant to § 83.232 Fla.Stat. (1993). Under the statute, rent is to be paid into the court registry during the pendency of the litigation. However, pursuant to a stipulation between the attorneys, the parties agreed that payments would be paid directly to the landlord. The tenant, Chartier, faded to abide by the terms of the stipulated agreement and, after notice, the trial court entered a default as permitted by § 83.232(5). Subsequently, the trial court entered a writ of possession in favor of the landlord. The circuit court, in its appellate capacity, ultimately sustained the writ of possession. We find there was no departure from the essential requirements of the law and therefore, the petition for certiorari is demed.

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

PER CURIAM.

TMs case comes before tMs court on a petition for common law certiorari to review a decision of the circuit court acting in its appellate capacity. The underlying action involves a commercial lease. During the pendency of a suit for possession brought by Sherman, the landlord, he moved for payment of rent pursuant to § 83.232 Fla.Stat. (1993). Under the statute, rent is to be paid into the court registry during the pendency of the litigation. However, pursuant to a stipulation between the attorneys, the parties agreed that payments would be paid directly to the landlord. The tenant, Chartier, faded to abide by the terms of the stipulated agreement and, after notice, the trial court entered a default as permitted by § 83.232(5). Subsequently, the trial court entered a writ of possession in favor of the landlord. The circuit court, in its appellate capacity, ultimately sustained the writ of possession. We find there was no departure from the essential requirements of the law and therefore, the petition for certiorari is demed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

672 So. 2d 604, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 4308, 1996 WL 194349, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/chartier-v-sherman-fladistctapp-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack