Florida Statute 56.20 | Lawyer Caselaw & Research

The 2024 Florida Statutes

Title VI
CIVIL PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE

Chapter 56
FINAL PROCESS

View Entire Chapter

F.S. 56.20

56.20 Executions on judgments against third person claimants.—If the execution issued on the judgment is not paid, it shall be satisfied in the usual manner unless on demand of the officer holding it, the principal and surety in the claim bond deliver the property released under the claim bond to the officer and pay him or her the damages and costs awarded to the judgment creditor. If the property is returned to the officer but damages and costs are not paid, execution shall be enforced for the damages and costs. If part of the property is returned to the officer, the execution shall be enforced for the value, fixed as aforesaid, of that not returned. All property returned shall be sold under the original execution against the judgment debtor.

History.—RS 1201; GS 1630; RGS 2834; CGL 4521; s. 11, ch. 67-254; s. 305, ch. 95-147; s. 13, ch. 2016-33.

Note.—Former s. 55.43.

F.S. 56.20 on Google Scholar

F.S. 56.20 on Casetext

Amendments to 56.20

Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 56.20

Level: Degree
Misdemeanor/Felony: First/Second/Third

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 56.20.

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases Citing Statute 56.20

Total Results: 13

Planned Parenthood of Southwest and Central Florida v. State of Florida & Planned Parenthood of Southwest & Central Florida v. State of Florida

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 2024-04-01

Snippet: Gainesville Woman Care, 210 So. 3d at 1253-56, 20. Even if we gave significantly greater weight

Young Bock Shim v. Frederick F. Buechel, etc.

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 2022-05-26

Snippet: applicable rules of civil procedure. Sections 56.16-56.20 apply to any order issued under this subsection

JOHN G. MCGREGOR v. FOWLER WHITE BURNETT, P.A.

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2021-12-01

Snippet: Notice to Appear may proceed under ss. 56.16- 56.20. § 56.29(3)(b), Fla. Stat. (2018) (emphasis added)

BIEL REO, LLC v. Barefoot Cottages Development etc.

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2014-12-11

Citation: 156 So. 3d 506

Snippet: aggrieved by the levy may proceed under ss. 56.16-56.20. 2 .Effective July 1, 2014, Section

Sanchez v. Century Everglades, LLC

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2006-12-13

Citation: 946 So. 2d 563, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 20777, 2006 WL 3615118

Snippet: the county sheriff, pursuant to sections 56.16-56.20, Florida Statutes (2005), asserting that the property

Exceletech, Inc. v. Williams

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1991-05-16

Citation: 579 So. 2d 850, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 4557, 1991 WL 77671

Snippet: aggrieved by the levy may proceed under ss. 56.16-56.20. Ehmann concluded that, in order for a trial court

The Florida Bar v. Shuminer

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 1990-10-11

Citation: 567 So. 2d 430, 15 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 542, 1990 Fla. LEXIS 1378, 1990 WL 153196

Snippet: lien for $500 and failed to pay sales taxes of $56.20, again misappropriating the funds. Shuminer entered

Jacksonville Bulls Football, Ltd. v. Blatt

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1988-12-13

Citation: 535 So. 2d 626, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 2699, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 5515, 1988 WL 131691

Snippet: aggrieved by the levy may proceed under ss. 56.16-56.20." [3] The proceeds of the sale to International

Mann v. GCC Beverages, Inc.

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1986-06-20

Citation: 490 So. 2d 184, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 1390, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 8437

Snippet: legislative scheme, encompassing sections 56.16 through 56.20, Florida Statutes, specifically developed to provide

Neff v. Adler

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1982-07-21

Citation: 416 So. 2d 1240

Snippet: aggrieved by the levy may proceed under ss. 56.16-56.20. ... . (9) The Court may enter any orders required

Adamek v. City of Port Richey

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1968-09-18

Citation: 214 So. 2d 374, 1968 Fla. App. LEXIS 4969

Snippet: is denied. See 6 Moore’s Federal Practice Par. 56.20; 31 F.S.A. Rule 1.510, Author’s Comment. LILES,

Fontainebleau Hotel Corp. v. Young

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1964-03-31

Citation: 162 So. 2d 303

Snippet: A.L.R.2d 1198. See 6 Moore, Federal Practice, ¶ 56.20[3] Part 3 (2nd ed. 1953); and Annot. 75 A.L.R.2d

Duboise Construction Co. v. City of South Miami

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 1933-10-31

Citation: 150 So. 712, 112 Fla. 565, 1933 Fla. LEXIS 2305

Snippet: Total costs allowed in Supreme Court .......... $56.20 *Page 566 The item of $155.00 claimed for costs