Florida District Courts of Appeal, 1990

Casey v. Picinich

Casey v. Picinich
Florida District Courts of Appeal · Decided December 28, 1990 · Garrett, Letts, Stone
573 So. 2d 76; 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 9741; 1990 WL 211735 (Southern Reporter, Second Series)

Casey v. Picinich

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

We affirm as to all issues on appeal, except one. Appellees have conceded that appellant is entitled to $54.38 as interest earned on his security deposit and $25 from the portion of the security deposit retained by them. In addition, we find that appellant is entitled to another $20, the balance of the retained security deposit. Appellees’ untimely notice forfeited their right to impose any claim upon appellant’s security deposit. § 83.49(3)(a), Fla.Stat. (1987).

Therefore, we reverse and remand with directions to enter judgment in favor of appellant in the amount of ninety-nine dollars and thirty-eight cents ($99.38) and the amount of his apportioned costs, if any.

STONE and GARRETT, JJ., concur. LETTS, J., dissents in part with opinion.

Dissenting Opinion

LETTS, Judge,

dissenting in part.

In my opinion the appellant is only entitled to the return of $45.00 ($25.00 plus $20.00; see opinion). I am also not sure what “apportioned costs” the majority is approving. Whatever, I dissent as to the award of costs.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.