TOWER FORTY-ONE ASSOCIATION, APPELLANT,
v.
HELEN LEVITT, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
A condominium association sought to enforce its bylaws prohibiting business and religious activities on common elements against a unit owner who operated a real estate brokerage office and displayed a Succah (Jewish religious structure). The trial court granted injunctive relief enforcing the bylaws, and the appellate court affirmed, finding no error in preventing violations of the association's own rules.
The court affirmed the trial court's judgment granting injunctive relief, finding no error in enforcing the condominium association's bylaws that prohibited business and religious activities on common elements.
[1] A condominium association may be prohibited from violating its own by-laws by permitting a business or religious display on common elements.
[2] A trial court may grant injunctive relief to prevent a condominium association from violating its by-laws.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“We find no error in a trial court prohibiting a condominium association from violating its own by-laws by permitting a business (a real estate brokerage office) and a religious display (a Succoh) in or on the common element.”
The court's holding that the trial court properly enforced the association's bylaws against the unit owner's business and religious activities.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceTower Forty-One Association, a condominium association, prohibited a unit owner from conducting a real estate brokerage business in a condominium unit…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Injunctive Relief cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
We find no error in a trial court prohibiting a condominium association from violating its own by-laws1 by permitting a business (a real estate brokerage office)2 and a religious display (a Succoh)3 in or on the common element. White Egret Condominium, Inc. v. Franklin, 379 So. 2d 346 (Fla.1980); Hidden Harbour Estates, Inc. v. Basso, 393 So. 2d 637 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981); Pepe v. Whispering Sands Condominium Association, Inc., 351 So. 2d 755 (Fla. 2d DCA 1977). Therefore the final judgment granting in-junctive relief is affirmed.
Affirmed.
JORGENSON, Judge, specially concurring.
I agree with the result reached in this case. I write separately only to suggest the need for a more appropriate forum for the resolution of disputes between unit owners and condominium associations. The procedures set forth in sections 718.112(2)(m) and 718.1255, Florida Statutes (Supp.1982), though a step in the right direction, are insufficient to relieve the burden on the court system. I join Chief Judge Schwartz in pointing out that our courts are “already overburdened by matters which, unlike this, justify their attention,” Kirou v. Oceanside Plaza Condominium Association, Inc., 425 So. 2d 650 at 651 n. 3 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983).
. The bylaws provide in part as follows: “No industry, business, trade, occupation or profession of any kind, commercial, religious, educational, or otherwise, shall be conducted, maintained, or permitted on any part of the property or in any condominium parcel...”
. We do not find that the broker was an indispensable party, Lyons v. King, 397 So. 2d 964 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981); Backus v. Smith, 364 So. 2d 786 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978) even if the issue was properly preserved, which in the instant case, it was not. Engel Mortgage Company, Inc. v. Dowd, 355 So. 2d 1210 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977); Rule 1.140(b)(2), Florida Rules of Civil Procedure.
.A Succoh is used during the Jewish “Feast of Tabernacles” or Jewish holiday of Succoh wherein a small temporary shelter is built with closed sides and partially open to the sky. It is symbolic in nature and used to celebrate the Jewish holiday.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Sockolof v. Eden Point N. Condo. Ass'n, Inc., 487 So. 2d 1114 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986)…sought and the amount of attorney’s fees incurred. Nevertheless, the legislature has designated the courts as the appropriate forum for litigating disputes between unit owners and condominium associations, see Tower Forty-One Association v. Levitt, 426 So. 2d 1290, 1291 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983) (Jorgenson, J., specially concurring); large attorney’s fees result from extensive litigation. Because we find that the award of attorney’s fees fell within the parameters of the expert testimony, we affirm the Judgment for…
-
Martin v. KEY Largo Kampground, Inc., 501 So. 2d 648 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986)…ngly, REVERSED.1 . We remain hopeful, though not optimistic, that the legislature will provide a forum to settle disputes of this nature without employing the full panoply of trial and appellate procedures. See Tower Forty-One Ass'n v. Levitt, 426 So. 2d 1290, 1291 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983) (Jorgenson, J., specially concurring); see also Kirou, 425 So. 2d at 651 n. 3.…
Authorities Cited
- White Egret Condo., Inc. v. Franklin, 379 So. 2d 346 (Fla. 1979)
- Hidden Harbour Ests., Inc. v. Basso, 393 So. 2d 637 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981)
- Pepe v. Whispering Sands Condo. Ass'n, Inc., 351 So. 2d 755 (Fla. 2d DCA 1977)
- Kirou v. Oceanside Plaza Condo. Ass'n, Inc., 425 So. 2d 650 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)
- Engel Mortg. Co., Inc. v. Dowd, 355 So. 2d 1210 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977)
- Lyons v. King, 397 So. 2d 964 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981)
- Backus v. Smith, 364 So. 2d 786 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978)