Recanzone v. May Co.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Recanzone v. May Co.

712 So. 2d 474, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 7972, 1998 WL 347246

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJuly 1, 1998

DocketNo. 98-0974

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 712 So. 2d 474 (Recanzone v. May Co.) 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

Recanzone v. May Co., 712 So. 2d 474, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 7972, 1998 WL 347246 (Fla. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The petitioner seeks to compel the Palm Beach County circuit court to exercise jurisdiction over an action for damages and for injunctive relief, brought under sections 559.77 et seq., Florida Statutes (relating to consumer debt collection practices), and sections 501.201 et seq., Florida Statutes (relating to deceptive and unfair trade practices). The circuit court transferred the case to the county court, finding that it did not have jurisdiction because it was persuaded by the arguments of the defendant that the amount in controversy did not exceed the county court’s $15,000 jurisdictional amount. We grant the petition.

Because the circuit and county courts have concurrent jurisdiction over such actions when equitable relief is sought, qualified only in that, if brought in county court, such actions must fall within the $15,000 monetary jurisdictional amount, the trial court erred in refusing to exercise jurisdiction over a matter which clearly was within its jurisdiction. See Alexdex Corp. v. Nachon Enters., Inc., 641 So.2d 858 (Fla.1994); Coral Springs Tower Club II Condominium Ass’n v. Dizefalo, 667 So.2d 966 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996) (in mandamus proceeding, instructing circuit court to vacate order transferring to county court a foreclosure action where amount in controversy was less than $15,000).

GUNTHER, GROSS and TAYLOR, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

The petitioner seeks to compel the Palm Beach County circuit court to exercise jurisdiction over an action for damages and for injunctive relief, brought under sections 559.77 et seq., Florida Statutes (relating to consumer debt collection practices), and sections 501.201 et seq., Florida Statutes (relating to deceptive and unfair trade practices). The circuit court transferred the case to the county court, finding that it did not have jurisdiction because it was persuaded by the arguments of the defendant that the amount in controversy did not exceed the county court’s $15,000 jurisdictional amount. We grant the petition.

Because the circuit and county courts have concurrent jurisdiction over such actions when equitable relief is sought, qualified only in that, if brought in county court, such actions must fall within the $15,000 monetary jurisdictional amount, the trial court erred in refusing to exercise jurisdiction over a matter which clearly was within its jurisdiction. See Alexdex Corp. v. Nachon Enters., Inc., 641 So.2d 858 (Fla.1994); Coral Springs Tower Club II Condominium Ass’n v. Dizefalo, 667 So.2d 966 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996) (in mandamus proceeding, instructing circuit court to vacate order transferring to county court a foreclosure action where amount in controversy was less than $15,000).

GUNTHER, GROSS and TAYLOR, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

712 So. 2d 474, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 7972, 1998 WL 347246, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/recanzone-v-may-co-fladistctapp-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack