A U.S. Marshal walks away from the front door of Joe Carollo’s residence in Coconut Grove after posting notices on Friday, Feb. 2, 2024. U.S. Marshals seized the property of Miami Commissioner Joe Carollo after losing a civil trial accusing him of having abused his public rights. desk.
jiglesias@elnuevoherald.com
Miami City Commissioner Joe Carollo may be out of legal luck if he hopes to keep his Coconut Grove residence.
His home and personal belongings are on the line as he faces the reality of paying a $63.5 million judgment won last year by two Little Havana businessmen who accused him of trying to destroy their livelihoods by sending Miami code enforcement officers into their Ball & Chain restaurant and club .
On Friday, U.S. Marshals issued a notice of seizure of Carollo’s Morris Lane residence, a residence he did not place under homestead exemption to protect him from losing the home, property records show. Lacking that protection, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida could issue an order requiring deputy marshals to prepare to seize the two-story, 5,243-square-foot residence located on a quarter-acre lot. acre.
Here’s what you need to know:
Why Carollo Could Lose His Miami Home
Carollo purchased the house for $574,700 in 2001, but he has not claimed a homestead exemption in the past three years, according to land records. A property exemption application was filed in 2024, but the status is pending. The property exemption would indicate that the Grove residence is Carollo’s primary residence, making it elusive.
However, approval at this stage would make little difference, said Dennis Eisinger, managing partner at Eisinger Law in Hollywood.
“Based on my best understanding of the law, it’s too late for him.” If it wasn’t a farm and if it wasn’t a farm for three and a half years before the ruling, then it’s not a farm,” Eisinger said.
A homeowner must live in a residence for 3 1/2 years and already have a homeownership exemption for that residence to be protected in the event of a forced sale or judgment.
Can Carollo appeal the decision?
Carollo has the right to push back, asking to overturn the decision.
“He has judicial means to overturn the seizure if it was an illegal seizure,” Eisinger said. “It happens quite frequently when you lose your property and you actually try to stop the action by filing some sort of petition or lawsuit, attesting to why that property should be protected.”
An attempt to overturn the decision can take several months, much like a foreclosure proceeding in which a lender seizes a home after a homeowner fails to pay their mortgage. This process can take six to eight months.
What are the legal issues?
Carollo’s defense attorneys, Ben Kuehne and Marc Sarnoff, urged the federal judge who oversaw the city commissioner’s trial to vacate the Southern District Court clerk’s Jan. 9 writ of execution, authorizing the U.S. Marshals Service to seize the house.
U.S. District Judge Rodney Smith, who had authorized the garnishment of Carollo’s wages and other assets, asked Magistrate Judge Lauren Fleischer Louis to reconsider her attorneys’ request as U.S. Marshals prepare to the seizure of the commissioner’s residence.
In court documents, Carollo’s lawyers argue that the order itself is “overly broad,” saying it provides for the seizure of all “property and personal effects, land and buildings” belonging to Carollo without any details or limit.
But rather than focusing on seizing Carollo’s home on Morris Lane, his attorneys argue the subpoena should be stayed until there is a complete inventory of the commissioner’s personal property in the residence that could be seized by US Marshals.
“The writ of execution does not take into account the marital property existing in the marital home of Mr. and Mrs. Carollo and is therefore too broad,” the lawyers wrote. “Marital property accounting is the standard Florida practice and procedure used by courts when enforcing judgments.”
Plaintiffs’ attorneys Bill Fuller and Martin Pinilla say the clerk’s order is “valid” and that Carollo and his attorneys are trying to prevent the seizure of his home and other property without any legal basis.
“Carallo is not entitled to an order compelling any other form of ‘compromise’ he requests from this court,” they wrote in a court filing, adding that his lawyers failed to follow basic legal procedures .
This story was originally published February 2, 2024, 7:40 p.m.
Support my work with a digital subscription
