HomeMy WebLinkAbout0961 with i~istructions for levy, tl~~ Stteriff of St. Lucie
County lev~ed oi~ certaizi real property owned by Petitionc~r,
Idea2 Ranch Uevelopment Ccirporation, which property is
legally cicscribed as follows: ,
t
The SE 1/4 of the tJE 1/4 of Section '
10 Townsl~ip 34-S Range 39-E; less the E ~
75 Feet along and parallel to tne E. Section
line of said section; and less the E. 300
feet o~ ti~e W 930 feet of the P~ 1/2 of the
?J 1/2 of th~ SE I/4 of the NE 1/4 of said
. section; and less the E 150 feet of the ~V ~
1080 feet of the :I 1/2 of the S 1/2 of The - ;
SE 1/4 of the [~~L•' 1/4 of said section. And the ;
t~ 1/2 of ~he N 1/2 of the St~ I/4 of the NE 1/4
of Section 10; Township 34-S, Range 39-E;
less the W, 96 feet along and parallel to the
v- S 1/4 Section line of said section, And the E.
1115 feet of the S 1/2 of the N 1/2 of the ~
SW 1/4 of the NE 1/4 of Section 10 Township }
34-S, Range 39-C. And the S 1/2 of the SW 1/4 of the t
I~E 1/4 of Section 10, Township 34-5, Range
39-E; less the W 46 feet along and parallel ~
to the N-S 1/4 Section line ot sa.id section. '
~ And the N 1/2 of the SE 1/4 of Section 10, ~
. Township 34-S, Range 39-E; less the E 7S feet along
and parallel to the E section Iine of said section;
ard less the W 46 feet along and parallel to -
the N-S 1/4 section line of said section.
4. At no tim~ was Ideal Ranch Development Corporati~n
~r.ovidc~d t,rith riotice of the sale as is re~~uired by Florida
Statute Section 56.21.
5. Prior to the sale, Ideal Ranch Development ~
Corporation discharged part of the obligations ~iue under ~
• ;
the cvrit of execution and satisfied the cost judgment
entered by this Court embodied in that certain order i
i
taxii~g costs dated January 6, 1978. ?
G. At no time was the Sheriff of St. Lucie County '
notified that responclent, Ideal Ranch Development
Corporation had paid Manuel Arvesu the cost judgment
referred to ~~b~ave,but the Sneriff of St. Lucie County
a arent~ levied on the real ro ert ~
PP Y p p y ~ith the assumption ;
;
- that n~ part of the writ had been discharged.
7. The value ~f the real prooerty described above
exceeds $350,000.00 an~] the court finds in addition to ~
the above, that the bid made at the sale were inadequate.
8. That the sale held by the Sheriff of St. Lucie ~
~ . so~K 3U3 FAGE 9Sp ~
. - - - - - _ - - - '
. . . _ . ; ~