RIVIERA CONDOMINIUM APARTMENTS, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION NOT FOR PROFIT, APPELLANT,
v.
MORRIS WEINBERGER, SANFORD BACON, LEWIS WEINBERGER AND PICKWICK WEST LAKE COMPANY, A FLORIDA 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.
Riviera Condominium Apartments, a non-profit condominium association, appealed a directed verdict in favor of the developer and its officers who charged the association a $7,500 management fee. The court affirmed, holding that the association failed to establish a prima facie case because the management fee was disclosed to purchasers and members had accepted the charge in their closing contracts.
The court held that the appellant did not make out a prima facie case for relief. Under the holdings in Fountainview Association, Inc. v. Bell and Wechsler v. Goldman, members of a non-profit condominium association cannot object to charges when those charges were disclosed and accepted by purchasers in their closing contracts.
[1] A condominium association cannot recover for alleged unfair dealing by promoters when the association's members had knowledge of the dealings prior to purchasing their un…
[2] Purchasers of condominium units are bound by terms and conditions disclosed in their closing contracts, even if those terms were imposed by the developer.
Previewing 2 of 5 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“the individual appellees were officers and directors of both the appellant and appellee corporations. It affirmatively appears that the management services were performed and that each new member of the appellant corporation had knowledge prior to his purchase that a charge for management services would be made in the approximate amount actually charged.”
Establishes the key facts showing disclosure and knowledge of the charge by association members
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceRiviera Condominium Apartments, Inc. is a non-profit corporation organized under Florida law representing condominium apartment owners. The individual…
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 Directed Verdict Standard cases and more on FLexlaw
The plaintiff, Riviera Condominium Apartments, Inc., is a non-profit corporation organized pursuant to Chapter 711, Fla.Stat., F.S.A. It appeals from a final judgment for the defendants, the corporation which promoted, built, and sold condominium apartments of which the plaintiff is comprised, and three individuals who were officers and directors of the defendant corporation. The final judgment was based upon a directed verdict granted in accordance with a reservation of ruling at the conclusion of the plaintiff’s case. The substantial question presented is whether the evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, could support the jury verdict for the plaintiff. See, e. g., Swilley v. Economy Cab Co. of Jacksonville, Fla.1951, 56 So.2d 914.
The evidence presented at the trial, viewed in the light most favorable to the verdict, established that the individual ap-pellees were officers and directors of the plaintiff-appellant non-profit corporation from the time it was organized until it was turned over to the purchasers of the condominium apartments. About two weeks before control of the apartment house was to be turned over, the individual appellees paid a $7,500 management fee to the appellee corporation. As stated above, the individual appellees were then officers and directors of both the appellant and appellee corporations. It affirmatively appears that the management services were performed and that each new member of the appellant corporation had knowledge prior to his purchase that a charge for management services would be made in the approximate amount actually charged.
In Wechsler v. Goldman, Fla.App.1968, 214 So.2d 741, we dealt with a similar case in which the individual plaintiffs, members of a non-profit condominium association, sought to cancel a lease alleged to be unconscionable. In that case we held that the individual plaintiffs could not object to the lease, since they had accepted the lease in their closing contract. We also said:
“It is not without some reluctance that we hold the plaintiff condominium associations do not have a cause for relief against the claimed exorbitant lease rental obligation imposed on them while both lessor and lessee were owned or controlled by the promoters. However, we affirm the decree on the authority of Fountainview Association, Inc., No. 4 v. Bell, Fla.App.1967, 203 So.2d 657, which, on review by the Supreme Court of Florida, recently was held to have been correctly decided. See Fountainview Association, Inc. [No. 4] v. Bell, Fla.1968, 214 So.2d 609, * * *.
“What occurred in this instance and in the Fountainview case may indicate a need for legislative action to amend the Condominium Act (Ch. 711, Fla.Stat., F.S.A.) to prevent unfair dealing by promoters of condominium associations.” 214 So.2d at 744.
It is clear that under the holding in Fountainview Association, Inc. v. Bell, Fla.App.1967, 203 So.2d 657, and the holding in Wechsler v. Goldman, Fla.App.1968, 214 So.2d 741, the appellant did not make out a prima facie case for relief.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Point E. Mgmt. Corp. v. Point E. ONE Condo. Corp., Inc., 282 So. 2d 628 (Fla. 1973)…be undergoing a similar progression. It is time to bring a halt to a line of decisions that are frustrating our Legislature’s efforts. See, e. g., Fountainview Association, Inc. # 4 v. Bell, supra; Riviera Condominium Apartments, Inc. v. Weinberger, 231 So. 2d 850 (Fla.App.1970); Wechsler v. Goldman, 214 So. 2d 741 (Fla.App.1968). As is stated in a recent law review article: “In most jurisdictions the developer is treated as a fiduciary acting on behalf of unknown persons who will purchase and become members…
-
Point E. Mgmt. Corp. v. Point E. ONE Condo. Corp., Inc., 258 So. 2d 322 (Fla. 3d DCA 1972)…red or passed upon in earlier cases cited and relied on by the appellant, Fountainview Association, Inc. v. Bell, Fla.App.1967, 203 So. 2d 657 (cert. discharged, Fla., 214 So. 2d 609); and Riviera Condominium Apartments v. Wein-berger, Fla.App.1970, 231 So. 2d 850. In denying the claim of the plaintiffs for accounting by the defendant management corporation, the judgment stated: “The Court finds for the defendant and against plaintiffs on the claims involved in this Count. The evidence establishes no misuse…
-
Free Bond, Inc. v. Comaza Int'l, Inc., 281 So. 2d 61 (Fla. 3d DCA 1973)…. v. Beefy King International, Inc., supra. Affirmed in part, reversed in part and remanded with directions. . No brief or appearance of counsel was made for appellees in this appeal. . Riviera Condominium Apts., Inc. v. Weinberger, Fla.App.1970, 231 So. 2d 850.…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Swilley v. Econ. Cab Co. of Jacksonville, 56 So. 2d 914 (Fla. 1951)
- Fountainview Ass'n, Inc. v. Bell, 203 So. 2d 657 (Fla. 3d DCA 1967)
- Fountainview Ass'n, Inc. v. Bell, 214 So. 2d 609 (Fla. 1968)
- Abe Wechsler v. Al Goldman, 214 So. 2d 741 (Fla. 3d DCA 1968)