Gothard v. Gothard
Gothard v. Gothard
Opinion of the Court
We hold that the trial court erred as a matter of law in finding that it had no subject matter jurisdiction to consider a complaint for civil theft, “[bjecause plaintiff did not wait the required thirty (30) days before filing suit.” Section 722.11, Florida Statutes, requires that a person, “[bjefore filing an action under this section” seeking treble damages for civil theft “must make a written demand for payment,” and provides that if the person to whom the written demand is made complies within thirty days after receiving the demand, “that person shall be given a written release from further civil liability” by the person making the demand. Contrary to the finding of a federal judge in In re Naturally Beautiful Nails, 262 B.R. 131 (Bankr. M.D.Fla. 2001), we find nothing in the statute which bars the filing of a suit for civil theft before the aforementioned thirty-day time period has expired.
The order dismissing the claim of civil theft without prejudice is REVERSED, and the case is REMANDED to the trial court for further proceedings.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.