# Fuentes v. Faircloth

> District Court, S.D. Florida · August 21, 1970 · 317 F. Supp. 954

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9625065

## Case

- **Full name:** Margarita FUENTES, Individually, and as a Class for All Those Similarly Situated, Plaintiffs, v. Earl FAIRCLOTH, Attorney General for the State of Florida, and Firestone Tire and Rubber Company, Defendants
- **Court:** District Court, S.D. Florida
- **Decided:** August 21, 1970
- **Citations:** 317 F. Supp. 954; 1970 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10481
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Eaton
- **Judges:** Dyer, Mehrtens, Eaton
- **Cited by:** 29 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- **Red flag:** Reversed by Fuentes v. Shevin, 407 U.S. 67 (1972).
- Negative treatments: 1
- Distinguished by: 0
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9625065

## Opinion text

EATON, District Judge
(dissenting).
I respectfully dissent. I believe the question of the constitutionality of § 78.10, F.S.A. is before the Court and that the pre-judgment replevin procedure established by §§ 78.01, 78.04, 78.07, 78.08 and 78.10, F.S.A., lacks the essential elements of due process.
When the state authorizes the forcible entry of a person’s house prior to the establishment of the probable validity of a creditor’s claim, it contravenes the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Further, when one signs a contract which includes the words “in the event of default of any payment or payments, seller at its option may take back the merchandise,” he does not waive his Fourteenth Amendment right to “due process of law.”

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9625065. Public record. Not legal advice.