Emerald Grande West Condominium Association, Inc. v. William S. Abrams, II, Whaler Investment, LLC, Dollar Family, LLC No. 3, Geoffrey C. Mielenz, Jeanette M. Mielenz
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
Date FiledFebruary 12, 2020
Docket1D19-0760
StatusPublished
📰 News Coverage: Read the LAWS.com news report on this case
Full Opinion
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
STATE OF FLORIDA
_____________________________
No. 1D19-760
_____________________________
EMERALD GRANDE WEST
CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION,
INC.,
Appellant,
v.
WILLIAM S. ABRAMS, II, WHALER
INVESTMENT, LLC, DOLLAR
FAMILY, LLC NO. 3, GEOFFREY
C. MIELENZ, JEANETTE M.
MIELENZ; STELIE, LLC, STEPHEN
M. NORDNESS, LESLIE CANNELLA
NORDNESS; HENDRY P. ROBSON,
III; EJT ENTERPRISE, LLC
EMERALD GRANDE, LLC,
HARBORWALK HOSPITALITY,
LLC, and FIRST AMERICAN
TRUST, FSB,
Appellees.
_____________________________
On appeal from the Circuit Court for Okaloosa County.
John T. Brown, Judge.
February 12, 2020
BILBREY, J.
Emerald Grande West Condominium Association appeals a
final summary judgment entered on the second count in its
complaint for declaratory judgment. We reverse and remand for
further proceedings.
The Association and several individuals filed a two-count
complaint. In the second count of the complaint, the Association
sought a declaration that a provision in the Declaration of
Condominium for Emerald Grande West, a condominium in
Okaloosa County, is unenforceable as contrary to Florida law.
That provision in the Declaration forbids the Association from
independently terminating a management agreement. The first
count of the complaint is not at issue in this appeal.
The Association and other plaintiffs moved for summary
judgment as to both counts. The defendants, including the
condominium developer and condominium’s management
company, also moved for summary judgment. The plaintiffs,
including the Association, asserted that the Association has the
authority under Florida law to terminate a contract with the
management company without a vote of the unit owners, despite a
provision in the Declaration to the contrary. The defendants, on
the other hand, asserted that the Declaration does comply with
Florida law and that, because there was no present controversy
about the provision in question, plaintiffs were impermissibly
seeking an advisory opinion.
After a hearing on the pending summary judgment motions,
the trial court concluded that the plaintiffs were in fact seeking an
advisory opinion. Thus, the second count of the complaint was
dismissed. After the motion for rehearing was denied, the
Association appealed to this court.
By its complaint, the Association sought a ruling as to the
legality of a provision in the Declaration of Condominium. Such
relief is precisely the sort of relief intended by an action for a
declaratory judgment. See § 86.021, Fla. Stat. (2016). The
“purpose of a declaratory judgment is to afford parties relief from
insecurity and uncertainty with respect to rights, status, and other
equitable or legal relations.” Santa Rosa Cnty. v. Admin. Comm’n,
2
Div. of Admin. Hearings, 661 So. 2d 1190, 1192 (Fla. 1995) (citing
Martinez v. Scanlan, 582 So. 2d 1167, 1170 (Fla. 1991)). The
Association is not seeking the termination of a contract under
section 718.302, Florida Statutes, and so Breakers of Fort Walton
Beach Condominiums, Inc. v. Atlantic Beach Management, Inc.,
552 So. 2d 274 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989), a case on which the Appellees
have relied, is not on point.
Accordingly, the trial court’s final summary judgment is
REVERSED as to its dismissal of count 2, and the cause is
REMANDED for further proceedings.
MAKAR and JAY, JJ., concur.
_____________________________
Not final until disposition of any timely and
authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or
9.331.
_____________________________
J. Nixon Daniel, III, John H. Adams, and Terrie L. Didier of Beggs
& Lane, RLLP, Pensacola, for Appellant.
Kimberly A. Ashby and Kevin D. Fowler of Foley & Larnder LLP,
Orlando, for Appellees Emerald Grande, LLC and Harborwalk
Hospitality, LLC.
3