Woodside Village Condo Assoc. v. Jahren case brief

Woodside Village Condominium Association, Inc. v. Jahren case brief summary
806 So. 2d 452 (Fla. 2002)

CASE SYNOPSIS

Petitioner condominium association sued respondent condominium owners to enforce leasing restrictions. The trial court granted the owners' summary judgment motion, and the Florida Second District Court of Appeal affirmed, contrary to decisions of the Florida Supreme Court and Third and Fourth District Courts of Appeal. The association sought further review.

CASE FACTS
The condominium association adopted an amendment to the declaration of condominium limiting all owners' ability to lease their units. The owners were notified two of their units did not comply with these limitations. The owners purchased these units before the amendment. The leasing restriction prevented a corporation which obtained federal financing to purchase units and lease them to handicapped persons from obtaining such financing, and it sued the association. In settlement, an amendment to the declaration exempted six units from the leasing restriction. The owners knew when they purchased their units they were subject to properly adopted amendments to the declaration, and the leasing restriction was such an amendment. 

DISCUSSION

• The restriction did not violate public policy or the owners' constitutional rights, as Fla. Stat. ch. 718.110(1)(a) (2000) granted broad authority to amend the declaration. 
• The distinction between the owners and the corporation owning exempted units was not an arbitrary or discriminatory creation of two classes of owners, but was related to providing handicapped persons an equal opportunity to enjoy a unit in the complex.

CONCLUSION
The judgment of the court of appeal was quashed.

NOTES
-P brought an action against a condo member, D, seeking enforcement of condo. leasing restrictions.

1. Rule: Restrictions passed by a condo. assoc. will be presumed valid unless shown to be arbitrary, against public policy, or in violation of a fund. constit. right.
2. Note* There is a stronger presumption of validity when a condo. restriction is made at the time of declaration vs. post-declaration.
3. Rst (Third) requires unanimous approval for any amendment to a condo dec that would restrict use or occupancy or deprive any owner of a significant property right; however, this rule is subject to being disclaimable if so provided in the declaration.