IRVING PICKER, AS CLASS REPRESENTATIVE, APPELLANT,
v.
MEYER LEVINSON, AARON KAGAN, SAMUEL KOTLER, LOUIS FRIEDMAN, ARTHUR BUDD, FRIEDA EUCHMAN, DR. HUMBERTO BAEZ, SADIE BRODSKY, DR. ABRAHAM FELDMAN, HENRY PENSO, AND ARMIN ROBINSON, AS OFFICERS AND DIRECTORS OF THE MAISON GRANDE CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC.; AND ROBERT L. SIEGEL, AS TRUSTEE OF THE ROBERT L. SIEGEL TRUST; AND AVATAR HOLDINGS, INC., A FOREIGN CORPORATION, APPELLEES
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 unit owner's class action challenging a recreation lease purchase was properly dismissed because Florida law requires only two-thirds owner approval, not formal proxies or a meeting, and the required approval was objectively demonstrated.
Section 718.111(12), Florida Statutes requires only the approval of two-thirds of unit owners to purchase a recreation lease, without requiring formal proxies or an association meeting.
[1] A condominium association's purchase of a recreation lease under Florida Statutes section 718.111(12) requires only the objective approval of two-thirds of unit owners, n…
Previewing 1 of 1 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“approval of two-thirds of the unit owners to purchase a recreation lease. See Waterford Point Condominium Apartments, Inc. v. Fass, 402 So. 2d 1327 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981)”
Statutory requirement for recreation lease purchase
A unit owner brought a class action challenging the proposed purchase of a recreation lease from the developer, alleging technical improprieties in pr…
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 Condominium Association Powers cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The plaintiff, a unit owner and member of a condominium association, brought a class action challenging the proposed purchase of the recreation lease from the developer. The basis of his complaint concerned alleged technical improprieties in the proxies secured from other owners; and the lack of a properly conducted meeting of the association to ratify the contract.
Section 718.111(12), Florida Statutes (1981), however, requires only the “approval” of two-thirds of the unit owners to purchase a recreation lease. See Waterford Point Condominium Apartments, Inc. v. Fass, 402 So. 2d 1327 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981), rev. denied, 412 So. 2d 465 (Fla.1982).
It specifically does not necessitate either formal proxies or an association meeting to evidence that approval. Compare, e.g., § 718.112(2)(f), Fla.Stat. (1981).
The face of the complaint shows, and it was not suggested otherwise, that the required percentage of owners had in fact “approved”, that is, objectively signified their assent to the purchase. Black’s Law Dictionary 94 (5th ed. 1979).
Since that is all that is legally necessary, the case was therefore properly dismissed with prejudice. The deficiency in the complaint is one which cannot be cured by amendment. DeMaris v. Asti, 426 So. 2d 1153 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); see also Affordable Homes, Inc. v. Devil’s Run, Limited, 408 So. 2d 679 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982).
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Affordable Homes, Inc. v. Devil's RUN, 408 So. 2d 679 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982)
- Demetra DeMARIS v. Asti, 426 So. 2d 1153 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)
- Waterford Point Condo. Apts., Inc. v. Fass, 402 So. 2d 1327 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981)