Florida Real Estate and Business Law Update for January 8, 2011 (Volume IV, Issue 2)

Manuel Farach

In a blow to homeowner’s assocations, the third district ruled that Fla. Stat. sec. 720.305 (2), the statute section that limits the fines an association can impose on members for violation of its rules, is retrospective in nature. The Pfeffers apparently went two years over the time limit for building their home, and the assocation issued fines of $240,000 under its rules for delay in construction. The association’s rule was passed in 1993 (or 1994, which indicates the association’s records were not clear on this point), the statute limiting fines was enacted in 1995 and the violations occurred in 2007 through 2009. See  Tahiti Beach Homeowners Ass’n, Inc. v. Pfeffer, — So.3d —-, 2011 WL 13701 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011). The third district held the statute section is procedural and remedial in nature, and accordingly, was to applied retrospectively. The summary judgment in favor of the Pfeffers was upheld.
Also of note this week, the Fourth District Court of Appeal re-interated its rule that injunctions based on restrictive covenants can apply to individual corporate officers as well as companies, a form of “piercing the corporate veil” in restrictive covenant law. The fourth district also re-iterated that a trial court may rule that the injunction period run from the date of the issuance of injunction judgment. In other words, the court can extend the injunction beyond the contract date and have the applicable period begin on the date of judgment. University Medical Clinics, Inc. v. Quality Health Plans, Inc., — So.3d —-, 2011 WL 13721 (Fla. 4^th DCA 2011).

See this week’s Case Law Update at Issue 2