Florida Statute 83.135 | Lawyer Caselaw & Research

The 2024 Florida Statutes

Title VI
CIVIL PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE

Chapter 83
LANDLORD AND TENANT

View Entire Chapter

F.S. 83.135

83.135 Dissolution of writ.—The defendant may move for dissolution of a distress writ at any time. The court shall hear the motion not later than the day on which the sheriff is authorized under the writ to levy on property liable under distress. If the plaintiff proves a prima facie case, or if the defendant defaults, the court shall order the sheriff to proceed with the levy.

History.—s. 4, ch. 80-282.

F.S. 83.135 on Google Scholar

F.S. 83.135 on Casetext

Amendments to 83.135

Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 83.135

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

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 83.135.

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases Citing Statute 83.135

Total Results: 7

Ago

Court: Florida Attorney General Reports | Date Filed: 2009-03-13

Snippet: exceptions to the Public Records Law). 4 See Ch. 83-135, Laws of Fla., creating s. 231.291, Fla. Stat.

Goodman v. Brasseria La Capannina, Inc.

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 1992-06-11

Citation: 602 So. 2d 1245, 17 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 353, 1992 Fla. LEXIS 1028, 1992 WL 125114

Snippet: 1980 amendment to the statute also added section 83.135, granting tenants the right to motion for dissolution

Remo v. Ecclestone

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1992-04-15

Citation: 599 So. 2d 1000, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 4274, 1992 WL 73364

Snippet: resorted instead to the procedure set forth in section 83.135, Florida Statutes (1989), which authorizes a defendant

Popejoy v. Greger

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1983-11-30

Citation: 441 So. 2d 1173, 1983 Fla. App. LEXIS 24372

Snippet: PER CURIAM. This is an appeal from the dismissal with prejudice of plaintiffs’ fifth amended complaint. The complaint was in two counts, but on appeal we are asked to reverse only as to Count II. We take the issue as presented in the briefs and thus do not consider Count I. Count II is based on the legal theory of “negligent entrustment.” We hold that the injured party herein was not a third party within the rationale of Boland v. Suncoast Rent-A-Scooter, 439 So.2d 916 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983); Jowanowitch

Tribune Co. v. Cannella

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1983-09-30

Citation: 438 So. 2d 516

Snippet: law enforcement and correctional officers. Ch. 83-135 and Ch. 83-136, Laws of Fla. These new laws, however

Snead Const. Corp. v. Langerman

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1978-07-12

Citation: 369 So. 2d 591

Snippet: Butte and Boulder Mining and Lumber Co., 48 Mont. 83, 135 P. 904 (1913) (Contract that repayment of loan

Ballas v. Lake Weir Light & Water Co.

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 1930-10-18

Citation: 130 So. 421, 100 Fla. 913

Snippet: Frank v. Butte and Boulder M. Lbr. Co., 48 Mont. 83, 135 Pac. R. 904, Edwards v. Baker, 39 Cal.App. 755