VILLAS ON THE GREEN HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION, INC. v. AVENTURA ISLES MASTER HOMEOWNERS' ASSOCIATION, INC.
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
Date FiledOctober 7, 2020
Docket3D19-1981
StatusPublished
📰 News Coverage: Read the LAWS.com news report on this case
Full Opinion
Third District Court of Appeal
State of Florida
Opinion filed October 7, 2020.
Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________
No. 3D19-1981
Lower Tribunal No. 18-18726
________________
Villas on The Green Homeowner's Association, Inc., et al.,
Appellants,
vs.
Aventura Isles Master Homeowners' Association, Inc., et al.,
Appellee.
An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Peter R. Lopez,
Judge.
Scott J. Edwards, P.A., and Scott J. Edwards (Boca Raton), for appellants.
Boyd Richards Parker & Colonnelli, P.L., and Amy L. Soto, Elaine D. Walter
and Yvette R. Lavelle, for appellee.
Before LOGUE, HENDON and GORDO, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
Affirmed. See Osius v. Barton, 147 So. 862, 865 (Fla. 1933) (“The general
theory behind the right to enforce restrictive covenants is that the covenants must
have been made with or for the benefit of the one seeking to enforce them.”); AT&T
Wireless Servs. of Fla., Inc. v. WCI Cmtys., Inc., 932 So. 2d 251, 254 (Fla. 4th DCA
2005) (“Deed restrictions on lands are deemed contractual in nature and subject to
the same rules of interpretation as are contracts.”); id. at 255 (“When a contract is
clear and unambiguous, the language used in the contract is the best evidence of the
intent of the parties, and the plain meaning of the language controls.”); White v.
Metro. Dade Cty., 563 So. 2d 117, 122–23 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990) (“In order to enforce
a deed restriction, plaintiffs must show that they sustained an injury that was greater
in degree than that sustained by the general public, or that the restriction in the deed
was intended for the plaintiffs’ benefit.”) (internal citations omitted).
2