County Civil Court:  LANDLORD/TENANT – demand notice – 5-day demand notice was legally sufficient as it set forth the exact amount due on the date it was due – final judgment affirmed.  Seeds v. Kings Manor Estates, L.L.C., Appeal No. 03-5072AP-88B (Fla. 6th Cir. App. Ct. Sept. 21, 2005). 












vs.                                                                                    Appeal No. 03-5072AP-88B



                                                                                        Appeal No. 05-0033AP-88A

KINGS MANOR ESTATES, L.L.C.,                              UCN522005AP000033XXXXCV




Appeal from Final Judgment

Pinellas County Court

Judge Walt Fullerton


Christopher S. Kuhn, Esquire

Attorney for Appellant/Cross-Appellee


Claudos G. Spears, Esquire

Attorney for Appellee/Cross-Appellant




            THIS CAUSE came before the Court on appeal, filed by Carolyn Seeds (Seeds), from the Final Judgment for Plaintiff, entered November 3, 2003, in favor of Kings Manor Estates, L.L.C. (Kings Manor), Appeal No. 03-5072AP-88B, and on appeal, filed by Kings Manor from the Order Requiring Deposit, entered April 14, 2005, Appeal No. 05-0033AP-88A.[1]  Upon review of the briefs, the record and being otherwise fully advised, the Court affirms the trial court’s rulings as set forth below.

            The underlying facts are not in dispute.  Pursuant to an oral lease, Seeds, a mobile home owner, leased a lot from Kings Manor, a mobile home park owner.  On March 26, 2003, Kings Manor filed its Complaint against Seeds seeking to evict Seeds for nonpayment of rent and to recover damages for unpaid rent.  A Demand for Payment of Lot Rental Amount was attached to the Complaint and demanded payment, within five days from the date of delivery of the notice, “for a total outstanding balance of $227.41.” (emphasis original).  After a hearing on the matter, the trial court entered Final Judgment for Plaintiff in the amount of $ 227.41 for unpaid rent; the trial court declined to award damages for uncut grass and illegally parked cars.  The trial court withheld eviction of Seeds, pending her payment of full rental fees and compliance with the rules and regulations of Kings Manor. 

            In reviewing the primary appeal, Appeal No. 03-5072AP-88B, the Court finds that Seeds’ sole argument is that the 5-day demand notice was not proper or legally sufficient as the notice did not contain the exact amount due on the date it was due.  Seeds cites to Kaplan v. McCabe, 532 So.2d 1354, 1357 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988) and Baker v. Clifford-Mathew Inv. Co., 99 Fla. 1229, 1234 (Fla. 1930) in support of her argument that a demand for rent by a landlord must set forth the exact amount due on the date it is due.  While both of these cases are good law, their applicability to the facts of this case is in doubt.

Unlike Kaplan, where the demand notice requested rent payment for the months of November and December without specifying an amount, and Baker, where there was not a demand notice whatsoever, the demand notice sent by Kings Manor to Seeds clearly specified an exact amount due on the date it was due, $ 227.41, which was ultimately awarded by the trial court.  More importantly, this case is controlled by Florida Statutes, § 723.061(1)(a), which provides, in pertinent part:

If a mobile home owner or tenant, whichever is responsible, fails to pay the lot rental amount when due and if the default continues for 5 days after delivery of a written demand by the mobile home park owner for payment of the lot rental amount, the park owner may terminate the tenancy.


Hence, the Court finds no reversible error as to this issue.

            Likewise, in addressing the issue raised in the second appeal, Appeal No. 05-0033AP-88A, the Court finds no error in the trial court’s Order Requiring Deposit wherein the trial court found that a delinquency existed and ordered Seeds to deposit the undisputed rental amount in a timely fashion into the court registry.  Upon the issuance of the mandate by the Clerk of Court in this appeal, the trial court will have jurisdiction to fully consider the parties’ respective arguments regarding the appropriate disbursement of funds and whether Kings Manor is entitled to possession of the subject rental lot. 

Therefore, it is,

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Appeal No. 05-0033AP-88A is consolidated into Appeal No. 03-5072AP-88B.  It is further

            ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Final Judgment for Plaintiff and the Order Requiring Deposit are affirmed.  It is further







            ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Appellee’s Motion for Appellate Attorney’s Fees, filed in Appeal No. 03-5072AP-88B, is granted pursuant to Florida Statutes, § 723.068.  The trial court shall determine the amount of reasonable appellate attorney’s fees to be awarded.  All other motions for attorney’s fees filed in either appeal are denied.

            DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers, at St. Petersburg, Pinellas County, Florida this ________ day of September 2005.







                                                                        DAVID A. DEMERS

                                                                        Circuit Judge, Appellate Division




Copies furnished to:


Judge Walt Fullerton


Christopher S. Kuhn, Esquire

1266 South Pinellas Avenue

Tarpon Springs, FL  34689


Claudos G. Spears, Esquire

Post Office Box 21518

St. Petersburg, FL  33742

[1] The Order Requiring Deposit was entered upon the relinquishment of jurisdiction to the trial court by this Court in Appeal No. 03-5072AP-88B.  The Court will consolidate these appeals, which both parties have requested, and address all issues in this Order and Opinion.  The Court also notes that Kings Manor filed a petition for common-law writ of certiorari seeking review of the Order Requiring Deposit, Appeal No. 05-000032AP-88B, which the Court will dispose of by separate order.