Muvico Entertainment, L.L.C. v. Pointe Orlando Development Co.

755 So. 2d 194, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 4429, 2000 WL 378208
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided April 14, 2000·No. No. 5D99-2641·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

SAWAYA, J.

We affirm the order rendered by the trial court requiring the appellant to deposit into the registry of the court rent that accrued as well as accrues during the pendency of the underlying action. We note, however, that subsection 83.232(2), Florida Statutes (1999), specifically provides that if the tenant contests the amount of money to be paid into the court registry, the court is limited to factual and legal issues concerning what constitutes rent under the lease agreement and whether the tenant is due any credits for rent that has been paid. Therefore, we make no determination concerning the trial court’s interpretation of the abatement clause contained in the lease agreement entered into between the parties to this action since that is a matter to be resolved at trial and not in proceedings under section 83.232.

AFFIRMED.

PETERSON and THOMPSON, JJ„ concur.

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

Muvico Entertainment, L.L.C. v. Pointe Orlando Development Co., 755 So. 2d 194, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 4429, 2000 WL 378208 (Fla. Ct. App. 2000).

755 So. 2d 194 (Muvico Entertainment, L.L.C. v. Pointe Orlando Development Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Double Park, LLC v. Kaine Parking 125, LLC
168 So. 3d 278 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2015)
INVEGO AUTO PARTS, INC. v. Rodriguez
994 So. 2d 1143 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2008)