211 So. 3d 42
Fla. Dist. Ct. App.2016Background
- Tenant leased 20,281 sq. ft. within an Embassy Suites hotel (restaurant/kitchen, atrium/gazebo, ballroom, two boardrooms).
- Tenant began renovating the restaurant without required city permits; the City red-tagged the restaurant as unsafe and closed it.
- Landlord chained and locked restaurant/kitchen/back offices, then terminated the lease and had police escort Tenant’s employees off the premises; Tenant ceased operations.
- Tenant sued for wrongful eviction and conversion; Landlord sued for breach of lease. At trial, court granted Tenant’s motion for a directed verdict on wrongful eviction, leaving damages to the jury.
- Jury awarded Tenant $8.8M for wrongful eviction and $2M for conversion; jury also found for Tenant on Landlord’s breach claim. Trial court denied prejudgment interest to Tenant.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether directed verdict for Tenant on wrongful eviction was proper | Landlord used unlawful self-help lockout of entire leased premises, so Tenant was wrongfully evicted | Lease authorized self-help/termination and thus Landlord could retake possession without a court order | Affirmed — directed verdict proper: statute bars self-help; termination alone did not vest possession in Landlord and no surrender/abandonment occurred |
| Whether Landlord could rely on lease language to justify lockout | N/A (Tenant) | Lease clause expressly permitted entry, expulsion, and termination without further notice | Rejected — statutory scheme (landlord–tenant law) limits recovery of possession to judicial action, surrender, or abandonment; lease cannot authorize unlawful self-help |
| Whether eviction was partial or total (extent of eviction) | Tenant argued entire 20,281 sq. ft. was effectively deprived, preventing continued operation | Landlord contended only the restaurant was locked out, so eviction was partial | Court did not need to decide novel partial-eviction law; found facts supported eviction of whole leased premises and affirmed verdict |
| Conversion damages sufficiency and prejudgment interest entitlement | Tenant sought conversion damages for contracts, remodeled space, fixtures, and inventory; sought prejudgment interest on wrongful eviction award | Landlord argued evidence did not support conversion award; trial court denied prejudgment interest | Conversion damages reversed (insufficient legal basis/evidence for many claimed items and improper general verdict); prejudgment interest reversed for Tenant (held entitled to interest; remanded to calculate) |
Key Cases Cited
- Meruelo v. Mark Andrew of Palm Beaches, Ltd., 12 So.3d 247 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009) (standard of review for directed verdict)
- Frenz Enters., Inc. v. Port Everglades, 746 So.2d 498 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999) (directed verdict review — view evidence for nonmoving party)
- Herrell v. Seyfarth, Shaw, Fairweather & Geraldson, 491 So.2d 1173 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986) (landlord cannot recover possession by self-help where statute prescribes judicial remedies)
- Joseph v. Chanin, 940 So.2d 483 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006) (definition of conversion requires dominion over personal property)
- Am. Int’l Land Corp. v. Hanna, 323 So.2d 567 (Fla. 1975) (real property not subject to conversion)
- Colangelo v. Stone Flex, Inc. of Fla., 551 So.2d 565 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989) (damages for conversion require proof of value at time of conversion)
- Sheffield v. Superior Ins. Co., 800 So.2d 197 (Fla. 2001) (party cannot invite error at trial and rely on it on appeal)
- Bosem v. Musa Holdings, Inc., 46 So.3d 42 (Fla. 2010) (prejudgment interest is an element of pecuniary damages; entitlement reviewed de novo)
- Argonaut Ins. Co. v. May Plumbing Co., 474 So.2d 212 (Fla. 1985) (prejudgment interest allowed when loss is pecuniary and can be fixed)