FL · rules
Fla. R. Civ. P. Form 1.937
Replevin
COMPLAINT
Plaintiff, A. B., sues defendant, C. D., and alleges:
1. This is an action to recover possession of personal property in
........... County, Florida.
2. The description of the property is:
(list property)
To the best of plaintiff’s knowledge, information, and belief, the value of the
property is $...........
3. Plaintiff is entitled to the possession of the property under a
security agreement dated.........., a copy of the agreement being attached.
4. To plaintiff’s best knowledge, information, and belief, the property
is located at...........
5. The property is wrongfully detained by defendant. Defendant came
into possession of the property by (method of possession). To plaintiff’s best
knowledge, information, and belief, defendant detains the property because
(give reasons).
6. The property has not been taken for any tax, assessment, or fine
pursuant to law.
7. The property has not been taken under an execution or
attachment against plaintiff’s property.
WHEREFORE plaintiff demands judgment for possession of the property.
NOTE: Paragraph 3 must be modified if the right to possession arose in
another manner. Allegations and a demand for damages, if appropriate, can be
added to the form.
History
Committee Notes 1980 Amendment. The form is amended to comply with the amendments to the replevin statutes pursuant to Fuentes v. Shevin, 407 U.S. 67, 92 S. Ct. 1983, 32 L. Ed. 2d 556 (1972).
Provenance
- Source
- floridabar.org
- Retrieved
- 2026-09-14
- Edition
- 2026-09-14
- Content hash
7f64235c9c3241d4dabeccbb4e6d36da80220f2780d8e6b2e7527d6fdbe70248
The link goes to the issuing authority’s own document — the one we read to produce this record. Where a source publishes whole titles rather than sections, your browser may need a moment to jump to the provision.
Unofficial copy of government-published law, reproduced from official sources with full provenance. Not an official publication; verify against official sources before relying on it in a filing. Records in the 'guidance' corpus, and only that corpus, are sub-regulatory (interpretive guidelines, survey procedures) and are not binding law. Validity bounds follow each jurisdiction's declared temporalBasis.