ROBERT J. YOUNG, APPELLANT,
v.
CIEGA VERDE CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC., 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.
Young appeals a judgment requiring him to pay a special assessment that included costs for converting a tennis court into a parking lot. The court reversed the portion of the judgment attributable to the tennis court conversion, holding that such a material alteration of common appurtenances requires unanimous consent from all unit owners and first mortgagees, which was never obtained.
The court held that the conversion of the tennis court, an appurtenance, to a parking lot constitutes a material alteration that requires approval of all record owners and all record holders of first mortgages. Because such approval was not obtained, the association cannot assess unit owners for this expenditure. The association may, however, assess for necessary repairs to the premises.
[1] A condominium association may not assess unit owners for an expenditure that materially alters or modifies an appurtenance to a unit unless all record owners of units and…
[2] The conversion of a condominium tennis court into a parking lot constitutes a material alteration of an appurtenance to a unit.
Previewing 2 of 3 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“[n]o amendment may ... materially alter or modify the appurtenances to the unit ... unless all record owners of units and all record holders of first mortgages approve the amendment.”
Establishes the contractual requirement from the Declaration of Condominium that all unit owners and first mortgagees must consent to material alterations of unit appurtenances.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceCiega Verde Condominium Association held a meeting to discuss parking problems and roof repairs. A motion to convert the tennis court into a parking l…
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.
Robert Young challenges that portion of a final judgment entered against him in favor of Ciega Verde Condominium Association, Inc., which is attributable to the cost of converting a tennis court at his condominium into a parking lot. We reverse.
Notice was given to the unit owners of the condominium for an Association meeting to discuss the parking problem and the bid for roof repairs to the condominium. The minutes of that meeting show that the motion to convert the tennis court into a parking lot passed unanimously by those owners present at the meeting. No further consents to converting the tennis courts into a parking lot were requested or obtained from any of the other unit owners or the first mortgagees on those units not present at the meeting. Specifically, neither the consent of the appellant nor the first mortgagee on his unit was ever obtained. The appellant did not attend the meeting. A Board of Directors meeting followed and they passed a special assessment in the amount of $10,000 per unit owner which included the tennis court conversion.
When the appellant failed to pay the assessment the Association filed suit asking that the lien for the assessment be foreclosed or judgment for money damages be entered. Following a bench trial, the court entered judgment against the appellant for $12,778.39 which included the $10,-000 assessment and interest, costs, and attorney’s fees. The appellant timely filed this appeal challenging the legality of the assessment.
Paragraph 21B of Ciega Verde’s Declaration of Condominium provides that “[n]o amendment may ... materially alter or modify the appurtenances to the unit ... unless all record owners of units and all record holders of first mortgages approve the amendment.” See § 718.110(4), Fla. Stat. (1989); Beau Monde, Inc. v. Bramson, 446 So. 2d 164 (Fla.2d DCA 1984). The Association did not obtain the approval of “all” of the unit owners and holders of first mortgages for the conversion of the tennis court, an appurtenance, to a parking lot. Accordingly, the Association may not assess the unit owners for this expenditure. The Association may, however, make an assessment upon the unit owners for necessary repairs to the premises.
We therefore reverse the final judgment and remand with instruction to deduct from the judgment any costs attributable to the conversion of the tennis court. In all other respects, we affirm the final judgment.
RYDER, A.C.J., and THREADGILL and BLUE, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Lambert v. The Berkley S. Condo. Ass'n, Inc., 680 So. 2d 588 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996)…at the hallway was effectively eliminated as a private unit and converted to a common element cannot be recognized. Therefore, the trial court’s finding in this regard is clearly erroneous and must be reversed. See Young v. Ciega Verde Condo. Ass’n, 600 So. 2d 528 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992). Therefore, we reverse the trial court’s order with respect to the ownership and maintenance of the hallway. As such, the hallway continues to be collectively owned by the commercial unit owners, who remain responsible for mainte…
-
Gilmore v. Ciega Verde Condo. Ass'n, Inc., 601 So. 2d 1325 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992)…materially alter or modify the appurtenances to the unit ... unless all record owners of units and all record holders of first mortgages approve the amendment.” See § 718.110(4), Fla.Stat. (1989); Young v. Ciega Verde Condominium Association, Inc., 600 So. 2d 528, (Fla. 2d DCA 1992). The condominium documents show that the tennis court is an appurtenance common to all unit owners. Because Ciega Verde did not obtain the consent of “all” of the unit owners for the conversion of the tennis court into a parking…
Authorities Cited
- Beau Monde, Inc. v. Bramson, 446 So. 2d 164 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984)