Replevin Concerns the Wrongful Detention of Property
The cause of action of replevin arises when another party wrongfully detains your property.
Replevin is strictly a possessory action where the sole legal issue is the right to immediate possession, not ownership or title. In a replevin action, the right of immediate possession is the question to be determined, and that right may prevail even against absolute legal title to the property where title and possession have become separated. Indeed, where the title and the right of immediate possession are separated, a temporary right to possession may prevail against an absolute legal right to the property. Accordingly, the matter of title is secondary.
Belvant v. Cohen, 50 Fla.L.Weekly D2503a (Fla. 3d DCA 2025) (citation omitted).
“The critical factor to consider [in a replevin action] is the wrong detention [of the property].” Id. In other words, the critical issue is the right to possess the property and not the actual ownership of the property. See id.
In Belvant, the plaintiff was the co-owner of a taxi permit that provided taxi drivers airport access. The plaintiff filed a lawsuit that included a replevin action against two defendants for the return of the taxi permit. An issue on appeal was whether the plaintiff was required to include his co-owner as a co-plaintiff:
[The plaintiff] filed the replevin count in his complaint against [the defendants] because those two defendants had possession of the permit/decal, as they had kept the decal after the agreement between the parties expired. [The plaintiff] needed the permit to continue his work as a taxi driver. Thus, it was correct for [the plaintiff] to name the two parties that had possession of the subject property at the time he filed his suit, and that is, [the defendants]. Here, as co-owner of the taxi decal/permit, [the plaintiff] could sue for replevin against [the defendants] without joining [his co-owner] as a plaintiff because [the plaintiff] had the right to immediate possession of the property. Thus, [the plaintiff] had the right to act independently to recover possession of the wrongfully detained taxi decal.
Please contact David Adelstein at dadelstein@gmail.com or (954) 361-4720 if you have questions or would like more information regarding this article. You can follow David Adelstein on Twitter @DavidAdelstein1.
