Chiusolo v. Kennedy, 614 So. 2d 491 (Fla. 1993). · Go Syfert
Search
Chiusolo v. Kennedy, 614 So. 2d 491 (Fla. 1993). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
138 citation events (95 in the last 25 years) across 8 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Liudmila Golubtsova v. Vladimir Budaev (fladistctapp, 2025-09-10)
Treatment trajectory · 1993 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1993 2009 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 50 distinct citers.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Liudmila Golubtsova v. Vladimir Budaev
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2025 · confidence medium
He or she must “establish a fair nexus between the apparent legal or equitable ownership of the property and the dispute embodied in the lawsuit.” Chiusolo v. Kennedy, 614 So. 2d 491, 492 (Fla. 1993).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Michael Alexander Trujillo v. Mysora Garcia
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2024 · confidence medium
The proponent of a lis pendens must “establish a fair nexus between the apparent legal or equitable ownership of the property and the dispute embodied in the lawsuit.” Chiusolo v. Kennedy, 614 So. 2d 491, 492 (Fla. 1993).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) HUTCHINS v. SCT TRADING, LLC, 8831 W. HILLSBOROUGH AVE, INC. (2×) also: Cited "see"
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2024 · confidence medium
See S & T Builders v. Globe Props., Inc., 944 So. 2d 302, 304 (Fla. 2006) ("We have interpreted the statutory reference to injunctions in section 48.23(3) of the Florida Statutes to authorize a trial court to require the posting of a bond . . . ."); Chiusolo, 614 So. 2d at 493 ("[T]he statutory reference to injunctions [in section 48.23(3)] exists merely to permit property holders to ask in an appropriate case that the plaintiff post a bond where needed to protect the former from irreparable harm.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Adeena Weiss-Ortiz, etc. v. TIG Romspen US Master Mortgage LP
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2023 · confidence medium
A notice of lis pendens serves the dual purpose of protecting “future purchasers or encumbrancers of the property from becoming ‘embroiled’ in the dispute, and . . . the plaintiff from ‘intervening liens that could impair any property rights claimed.’” Fischer v. Fischer, 873 So. 2d 534, 536 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004) (quoting Chiusolo v. Kennedy, 614 So. 2d 491, 492 (Fla. 1993)).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) ADEENA WEISS, etc. v. CAROLINE WEISS
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2023 · confidence medium
A notice of lis pendens serves the dual purpose of protecting “future purchasers or encumbrancers of the property from becoming ‘embroiled’ in the dispute, and . . . the plaintiff from ‘intervening liens that could impair any property rights claimed.’” Fischer v. Fischer, 873 So. 2d 534, 536 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004) (quoting Chiusolo v. Kennedy, 614 So. 2d 491, 492 (Fla.1993)).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Ekaterina Zakharova v. Innovative Technologies & Consulting Limited Corp.
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2023 · confidence medium
Further, Zakharova argued below that extending the notice of lis pendens was intended to serve the salutary threefold purpose “of protecting [future] purchasers or encumbrancers from becoming embroiled in the dispute, and of protecting the plaintiff from intervening liens that could impair any property rights claimed and also from possible extinguishment of the . . . unrecorded equitable lien.” Chiusolo v. Kennedy, 614 So. 2d 491, 492 (Fla. 1993) (footnote omitted).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Drummond v. Alsaloussi
S.D. Fla. · 2023 · confidence medium
Facilities Dev., Inc. v. Little Arch Creek Properties, Inc., 675 So. 2d 915, 917 (Fla. 1996) (citing Chiusolo v. Kennedy, 614 So. 2d 491, 492 (Fla. 1993)).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) FRANK E. WALSH, III v. KIMBERLY ABATE, SUCCESSOR TRUSTEE OF THE 3388 BARROW ISLAND TRUST
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2022 · confidence medium
“A court must dissolve a lis pendens that is based on an unrecorded document unless the proponent ‘establish[es] a fair nexus between the apparent legal or equitable ownership of the property and the dispute embodied in the lawsuit.’” Conseco Servs., LLC v. Cuneo, 904 So. 2d 438, 439 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005) (quoting Chiusolo v. Kennedy, 614 So. 2d 491, 492 (Fla. 1993)).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) PRONTOCASH, LLC v. THE AUTOBOUTIQUE OF MIAMI, INC. (2×) also: Cited "see, e.g."
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2021 · confidence medium
On de novo review of the record, we conclude that ProntoCash failed to show a “fair nexus between the apparent legal or equitable ownership of the property and the dispute embodied in the lawsuit.” Chiusolo v. Kennedy, 614 So. 2d 491, 492 (Fla. 1993).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Lb Judgment Holdings v. Boschetti
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2019 · confidence medium
Chiusolo v. Kennedy, 614 So. 2d 491, 492 (Fla. 1993); and (2) if there is such a nexus, what is the appropriate amount of a lis pendens bond to be required of the proponent, bearing “a reasonable relationship to the amount of damages which the property-holder defendant demonstrates will likely result if it is later determined that the notice of lis pendens was unjustified”?
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Weiss Ortiz v. Weiss
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2017 · confidence medium
Chiusolo v. Kennedy, 614 So.2d 491, 492 (Fla. 1993); Rodriguez v. Banco Indus. de Venezuela, C.A., 576 So.2d 870, 873 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991) (“When an action is not founded on a duly recorded instrument, the statute gives the trial court discretion to consider the extension and duration of the lis pen-dens on a case-by-case basis.”);; Avalon Assocs. of Delaware Ltd. v. Avalon Park Assocs., Inc., 760 So.2d 1132, 1134 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000) (determining unless the initial pleading shows that the action is founded on a duly recorded instrument, the court has the power to control the notice by discha…
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Landmark At Crescent Ridge LP v. Everest Financial, Inc., a California Corporation
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2017 · confidence medium
Without holding that the harm from the wrongful filing of a notice of lis pendens could never be “irreparable” for purposes of a petition for writ of certio-rari, the petition in this case fails to present facts and argument establishing that the harm caused by the lis pendens, even if erroneous, will be irreparable by a financial award or otherwise after a final judgment is entered. 2 In addition to protecting the plaintiffs claim during the pendency of the lawsuit, “a lis pendens exists as much to warn third parties” of a pending lawsuit with a “fair nexus between the apparent lega…
cited Cited as authority (rule) Jallali v. Knightsbridge Village Homeowners Ass'n
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2017 · confidence medium
Chiusolo v. Kennedy, 614 So.2d 491, 492 (Fla. 1993) (footnote omitted).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Fallon Rahima Jallali v. Knightsbridge Village Homeowners Association, Inc.
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2016 · confidence medium
Chiusolo v. Kennedy, 614 So. 2d 491, 492 (Fla. 1993) (footnote omitted).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) U.S. Bank Nat. Ass'n v. Quadomain Condominum Ass'n
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2012 · confidence medium
“Notices of lis pendens are recorded for two purposes: to protect future purchasers or encumbrancers of the prop erty from becoming ‘embroiled’ in the dispute, and to protect the plaintiff from ‘intervening liens that could impair any property rights claimed and also from possible extinguishment of the plaintiffs unrecorded equitable lien.’ ” Fischer v. Fischer, 873 So.2d 534, 536 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004) (quoting Chiusolo v. Kennedy, 614 So.2d 491, 492 (Fla.1993)).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Blue Star Palms, LLC v. LED Trust, LLC (2×)
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2012 · confidence medium
“A court must dissolve a lis pendens that is based on an unrecorded document unless the proponent ‘establishes] a fair nexus between the apparent legal or equitable ownership of the property and the dispute embodied in the lawsuit.’ ” Conseco Servs., LLC. v. Cuneo, 904 So.2d 438, 439 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005) (quoting Chiusolo v. Kennedy, 614 So.2d 491, 492 (Fla.1993)).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Centerstate Bank Central Florida, N.A. v. Krause
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2012 · confidence medium
Chiusolo v. Kennedy, 614 So.2d 491, 492 (Fla. 1993); Adhin, 44 So.3d at 1251-52 ; Avalon Assocs. of Del.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Tetrault v. Calkins (2×) also: Cited "see"
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2012 · confidence medium
Chiusolo v. Kennedy, 614 So.2d 491, 492 (Fla.1993) (citation omitted; footnote omitted).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Surtain v. Caprio
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2011 · confidence medium
To support a lis pendens, a plaintiff need not show a substantial likelihood of success on the merits, only a “fair nexus between the apparent legal or equitable ownership of the property and the dispute embodied in the lawsuit.” Chiusolo v. Kennedy, 614 So.2d 491, 492 (Fla.1993).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Adhin v. First Horizon Home Loans
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2010 · confidence medium
Chiusolo v. Kennedy, 614 So.2d 491, 492 (Fla.1993); see also Med.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Bock v. Slater
Okla. Civ. App. · 2010 · confidence medium
See Levin v. George Fraam & Sons, Inc., 65 Ohio App.3d 841 , 585 N.E.2d 527, 530 (1990); Chiusolo v. Kennedy, 614 So.2d 491, 492 (Fla.1993); 51 Am.Jur.2d Lis Pendens §§ 19 & 65 (2000). 6 . 5/13/09 Transcript, pp. 135-140.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Gillian Emery v. Frank Gallo
7th Cir. · 2009 · confidence medium
Lis pendens “protect[s] the plaintiff from intervening liens that could impair any property rights claimed and also from possible extinguishment of the plaintiff’s unrecorded equitable lien.” Chiusolo v. Kennedy, 614 So. 2d 491, 492 (Fla. 1993).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Emery, Gillian v. Gallo, Frank
7th Cir. · 2009 · confidence medium
Lis pendens “protect[s] the plaintiff from intervening liens that could impair any property rights claimed and also from possible extinguishment of the plaintiff’s unrecorded equitable lien.” Chiusolo v. Kennedy, 614 So. 2d 491, 492 (Fla. 1993).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) In Re Gallo
7th Cir. · 2009 · confidence medium
Lis pendens “protects] the plaintiff from intervening liens that could impair any property rights claimed and also from possible extinguishment of the plaintiffs unrecorded equitable lien.” Chiusolo v. Kennedy, 614 So.2d 491, 492 (Fla.1993).
cited Cited as authority (rule) HAVEN CENTER, INC. v. Meruelo
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2008 · confidence medium
S & T Builders v. Globe Props., Inc., 944 So.2d 302, 304 (Fla.2006) (citing Chiusolo v. Kennedy, 614 So.2d 491, 493 (Fla. 1993)).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Levin v. Lang
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2008 · confidence medium
Chiusolo v. Kennedy, 614 So.2d 491, 492 (Fla.1993).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Nickerson v. WATERMARK MARINA OF PALM CITY
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2008 · confidence medium
Section 48.23(3), Florida Statutes (2006), provides, with respect to actions that are not founded on a duly recorded instrument or a chapter 713 lien, "the court may control and discharge the notice of lis pendens as the court may grant and dissolve injunctions." Defendant property holders may ask plaintiffs in such suits to post a bond to protect them from harm, Chiusolo v. Kennedy, 614 So.2d 491, 493 (Fla.1993), and "the trial court's discretion to require a bond is not limited only to cases in which the property-holder defendant can show irreparable harm.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Florida West Realty v. Mdg Lake Trafford
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2007 · confidence medium
With that standard in mind, we recognize that "[o]ne of several purposes underlying the doctrine of lis pendens is that, when a suit is filed that could affect title in property, some notice should be given to future purchasers or encumbrancers of that property." Chiusolo v. Kennedy, 614 So.2d 491, 492 (Fla.1993) (citing De Pass v. Chitty, 90 Fla. 77 , 105 So. 148 (1925)).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Carran v. Morgan
S.D. Fla. · 2007 · confidence medium
The Court, however, cannot dissolve a lis pendens if the proponent establishes a “fair nexus between the apparent legal or equitable ownership of the property and the dispute embodied in the lawsuit.” Chiusolo v. Kennedy, 614 So.2d 491, 492 (Fla. 1993).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Taylor v. Steckel
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2006 · confidence medium
Chiusolo v. Kennedy, 614 So.2d 491, 492 (Fla.1993); see also Medical Facilities Dev., Inc. v. Little Arch Creek Prop., Inc., 675 So.2d 915, 917 (Fla.1996).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) S AND T BUILDERS v. Globe Properties, Inc.
Fla. · 2006 · confidence medium
Thus, "[t]he bond requirement . . . is a vehicle for protecting the property holders just as the lis pendens protects the plaintiff and third parties." Chiusolo v. Kennedy, 614 So.2d 491, 493 (Fla.1993).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Iannazzo v. Stanson
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2006 · confidence medium
"Notices of lis pendens are recorded for two purposes: to protect future purchasers or encumbrancers of the property from becoming `embroiled' in the dispute, and to protect the plaintiff from `intervening liens that could impair any property rights claimed and also from possible extinguishment of the plaintiff's unrecorded equitable lien.'" Fischer v. Fischer, 873 So.2d 534, 536 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004) (quoting Chiusolo v. Kennedy, 614 So.2d 491, 492 (Fla.1993)).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Bergmann v. Slater
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2006 · confidence medium
To support a lis pendens, the plaintiff is not required to show a substantial likelihood of success on the merits, only that there is a "fair nexus between the apparent legal or equitable ownership of the property and the dispute embodied in the lawsuit." Chiusolo v. Kennedy, 614 So.2d 491, 492 (Fla.1993) (footnote omitted).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Conseco Servs., LLC v. Cuneo (2×) also: Cited "see"
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2005 · confidence medium
A court must dissolve a lis pendens that is based on an unrecorded document unless the proponent "establish[es] a fair nexus between the apparent legal or equitable ownership of the property and the dispute embodied in the lawsuit." Chiusolo v. Kennedy, 614 So.2d 491, 492 (Fla.1993); Von Mitschke-Collande v. Kramer, 869 So.2d 1246 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004); Martell v. Dubner, 885 So.2d 469 (Fla. 4th DCA *440 2004).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) INDIA AMERICA TRADING, CO., INC. v. White
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2005 · confidence medium
To support a lis pendens, the proponent of the lis pendens has the burden of establishing "a fair nexus between the apparent legal or equitable ownership of the subject property and the dispute embodied in the lawsuit." Chiusolo v. Kennedy, 614 So.2d 491, 492 (Fla.1993); Martell v. Dubner, 885 So.2d 469, 471 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Martell v. Dubner
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2004 · confidence medium
To support a lis pendens, the plaintiff is not required to show a substantial likelihood of success on the merits, only that there is a "fair nexus between the apparent legal or equitable ownership of the property and the dispute embodied in the lawsuit." Chiusolo v. Kennedy, 614 So.2d 491, 492 (Fla.1993) (footnote omitted).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Fischer v. Fischer
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2004 · confidence medium
In the case of a section 48.23(3) lis pendens, the court cannot dissolve the lis pendens if the proponent establishes "a fair nexus between the apparent *536 legal or equitable ownership of the property and the dispute embodied in the lawsuit." Chiusolo v. Kennedy, 614 So.2d 491, 492 (Fla.1993).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) VON MITSCHEKE-COLLANDE v. Kramer (2×)
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2004 · confidence medium
A lis pendens provides notice to future purchasers or encumbrancers of real property that "a suit [has been] filed that could affect title in [that] property." Chiusolo v. Kennedy, 614 So.2d 491, 492 (Fla.1993)(emphasis added).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Gaeta Ltd. Partnerhip 1 v. Topline Printing & Graphics, Inc. (2×) also: Cited "see"
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2002 · confidence medium
Id. at 492 (footnotes and citation omitted) (emphasis added).
examined Cited as authority (rule) Aryeh Trading v. Trimfast Group, Inc. (3×) also: Cited "see"
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2000 · confidence medium
Id. at 493 (footnotes omitted).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Dowdy v. Charter Financial Group, Inc.
M.D. Fla. · 2000 · confidence medium
Chiusolo v. Kennedy, 614 So.2d 491, 492 (Fla.1993).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Taylor v. Cesery
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 1998 · confidence medium
Id. at 492 (footnote and citation omitted).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Med. Facilities Dev. v. Little Arch Creek (2×) also: Cited "see"
Fla. · 1996 · confidence medium
Chiusolo, 614 So.2d at 493 (footnote omitted).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Medical Facilities Development, Inc. v. Little Arch Creek Properties, Inc. (2×)
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 1995 · confidence medium
However, after resolving this issue, the opinion goes on to state the following: “We agree with the observation in Sparks, 568 So.2d at 517 , that the statutory reference to injunctions exists merely to permit property holders to ask in an appropriate case that the plaintiff post a bond where needed to protect the former from irreparable harm.” Chiusolo, 614 So.2d at 492-93 (emphasis added, footnote omitted).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Med. Fac. v. Little Arch Creek Properties (2×)
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 1995 · confidence medium
However, after resolving this issue, the opinion goes on to state the following: "We agree with the observation in Sparks, 568 So.2d at 517 , that the statutory reference to injunctions exists merely to permit property holders to ask in an appropriate case that the plaintiff post a bond where needed to protect the former from irreparable harm." Chiusolo, 614 So.2d at 492-93 (emphasis added, footnote omitted).
cited Cited "see" DELTA AGGREGATE, LLC and MICHAEL DESIMONE v. HERMES HIALEAH WAREHOUSE, LLC
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2019 · signal: see · confidence high
See Chiusolo v. Kennedy, 614 So. 2d 491, 492 (Fla. 1993); Lakeview Townhomes at the Calif.
discussed Cited "see" Robert Tribble, Jr. v. Stephanie Tew
11th Cir. · 2019 · signal: see · confidence high
See Chiusolo v. Kennedy, 614 So. 2d 491 , 492 & n.2 (Fla. 1993) (holding that the proponent of a lis pendens has the burden of proving a sufficient “nexus between the apparent legal or equitable ownership of the property and the dispute embodied in the lawsuit”).
cited Cited "see" Betsy Ross Hotel, Inc. v. AG GLADSTONE ASSOCIATES, INC.
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2002 · signal: see · confidence high
See Chiusolo v. Kennedy, 614 So.2d 491 (Fla. 1993). [2] Quoted from the court's syllabus.
cited Cited "see" Avalon Ass. of Del. Limited v. Avalon Park Ass. Inc.
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2000 · signal: see · confidence high
See Chiusolo v. Kennedy, 614 So.2d 491 (Fla.1993).
cited Cited "see" Avalon Associates of Delaware Ltd. v. Avalon Park Associates, Inc.
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2000 · signal: see · confidence high
See Chiusolo v. Kennedy, 614 So.2d 491 (Fla.1993).
Louis CHIUSOLO, Petitioner,
v.
William KENNEDY, Respondent.
79103.
Supreme Court of Florida.
Feb 25, 1993.
614 So. 2d 491
Per Curiam.
Cited by 69 opinions  |  Published

[*492] Leonard R. Ross and George D.E. Burden, Daytona Beach, for petitioner.

Richard A. Manzo of the Law Offices of Manzo & Praver, P.A., Titusville, for respondents.

PER CURIAM.

We have for review Chiusolo v. Kennedy, 589 So.2d 420 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991), which certified conflict with Cacaro v. Swan, 394 So.2d 538 (Fla. 4th DCA), review dismissed, 402 So.2d 608 (Fla. 1981). We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla. Const.

Petitioner Louis Chiusolo filed a lis pendens in connection with his lawsuit seeking to impose a resulting and constructive trust on certain real property in which he claimed an interest. The gist of the complaint in the suit was that Chiusolo had advanced funds ultimately used to purchase the property and in return was to receive stock in the corporation that actually owned the property. He alleged the stock was never given him. The trial court discharged the lis pendens, and Chiusolo appealed.

The en banc Fifth District reversed and in doing so receded from its own precedent in Sparks v. Charles Wayne Group, 568 So.2d 512 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990). The Fifth District held that the proponent of the lis pendens bears the burden of showing that the claim affects the real property in question and that there is a substantial likelihood of success on the merits. Id. at 421.

One of several purposes underlying the doctrine of lis pendens is that, when a suit is filed that could affect title in property, some notice should be given to future purchasers or encumbrancers of that property. DePass v. Chitty, 90 Fla. 77, 105 So. 148 (1925). This serves the purposes of protecting those purchasers or encumbrancers from becoming embroiled in the dispute,[1] and of protecting the plaintiff from intervening liens that could impair any property rights claimed and also from possible extinguishment of the plaintiff's unrecorded equitable lien. In sum, unlike a typical injunction, a lis pendens exists as much to warn third parties as to protect the plaintiff; and the procedural requirements associated with lis pendens should advance both of these important purposes.

Thus, we believe that the lis pendens cannot be dissolved if, in the evidentiary hearing on request for discharge, the proponent can establish a fair nexus between the apparent legal or equitable ownership of the property and the dispute embodied in the lawsuit.[2] To this end, the trial court need not determine whether there is any likelihood the property will be alienated or subjected to intervening liens during the pendency of the cause. The relevant question is whether alienation of the property or the imposition of intervening liens, if either actually occurred, conceivably could disserve the purposes for which lis pendens exists.[3] Where the answer is yes, fair nexus must be found.

Based on the policy outlined above, we do not agree that any greater proof is required of the proponent. We agree with[*493] the observation in Sparks, 568 So.2d at 517, that the statutory reference to injunctions[4] exists merely to permit property holders to ask in an appropriate case that the plaintiff post a bond where needed to protect the former from irreparable harm. The bond requirement, whenever appropriate, is a vehicle for protecting the property holders just as the lis pendens protects the plaintiff and third parties.

We approve in part and quash in part the opinion below. We disapprove Cacaro to the extent it conflicts with our views here. This cause is remanded for further proceedings in conformity with this opinion.

It is so ordered.

BARKETT, C.J., and OVERTON, McDONALD, SHAW, GRIMES and KOGAN, JJ., concur.

HARDING, J., concurs in part and dissents in part with an opinion.

HARDING, Justice, concurring in part and dissenting in part.

I concur with the majority opinion which holds that a lis pendens cannot be dissolved if a fair nexus between the apparent legal or equitable ownership of the property and the dispute embodied in the lawsuit can be established. I respectfully dissent from the majority opinion when it holds that the burden of proof is on the proponent of the lis pendens to show such a nexus. I agree with Judge Sharp in her opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part below that where the pleadings establish such a nexus, the burden should then be on the party challenging the lis pendens. Chiusolo, 589 So.2d at 422 (Sharp, J., dissenting).

1 It is true that, if lis pendens were not available, a subsequent third-party purchase might extinguish a plaintiff's unrecorded lien against the property. Nevertheless, legal theories still might exist by which the third-party purchaser could be sued, even if unsuccessfully. Thus, lis pendens exists at least in part to prevent third-party purchasers from "buying" a lawsuit when they purchase the property.
2 Thus, we agree that the burden of proof rests on the proponent, though the quantum of proof necessary is not as severe as that suggested by the District Court below.
3 Accordingly, it is possible for the property holder to obtain discharge of the lis pendens where sufficient measures have been taken to protect the interests claimed by the plaintiff, in the event those interests ultimately prove to be valid.
4 The lis pendens statute provides:

When the initial pleading does not show that the action is founded on a duly recorded instrument or on a lien claimed under part I of chapter 713, the court may control and discharge the notice of lis pendens as the court may grant and dissolve injunctions.

§ 48.23(3), Fla. Stat. (1991).