HAMPTONS DEVELOPMENT CORP. OF DADE, A FLORIDA CORPORATION, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS REGULATION, DIVISION OF FLORIDA LAND SALES, CONDOMINIUMS AND MOBILE HOMES; AND RORY SHUR, ET AL., 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.
Hamptons Development Corp. challenged a state agency's interpretation of Florida's condominium control-turnover statute, arguing that a temporary conveyance followed by reacquisition of units should not trigger mandatory unit-owner control of the board. The court affirmed the agency's ruling that once a developer conveys 50% of units and three years pass, unit owners permanently gain board control regardless of subsequent developer reacquisition.
Once a developer conveys 50% of condominium units to purchasers and three years elapse, unit owners other than the developer become permanently entitled to elect a majority of the board of administration. The developer cannot regain control of the association through subsequent reacquisition of units, as the statute contains no exception permitting such restoration of developer control.
[1] A condominium developer loses the right to elect a majority of the board of administration once unit owners other than the developer are entitled to elect a majority, and…
[2] The statutory phrase "conveyed to purchasers" in the context of condominium control turnover is not subject to interpretation based on the temporary nature of a conveyanc…
Previewing 2 of 4 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“Unit owners other than the developers are entitled to elect not less than a majority of the members of the board of administration of an association... Three years after 50 percent of the units that will be operated ultimately by the association have been conveyed to purchasers”
States the controlling statutory provision that the court interpreted.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceHamptons Development established a condominium on November 8, 1984, and sold 75 units to Consolidated Mortgage Company in December 1984, reducing its …
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 Declaratory Judgment cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Hamptons Development Corporation seeks to overturn a ruling by the Department of Business Regulation, Division of Land Sales, Condominiums and Mobile Homes (Division) interpreting section 718.-301(l)(a), Florida Statutes (1985). The statute provides:
Unit owners other than the developers are entitled to elect not less than a majority of the members of the board of administration of an association:
(a) Three years after 50 percent of the units that will be operated ultimately by the association have been conveyed to purchasers ....
The Hamptons West, a condominium, was established by the appellant developer on November 8,1984. In December of that same year, the developer sold seventy-five of its units to Consolidated Mortgage Company, retaining control of less than fifty percent of the units which would ultimately be operated by the condominium association. In August, 1986, less than three years later, the appellant-developer reacquired title, by foreclosure and judicial sale, of all of the seventy-five units previously conveyed to Consolidated Mortgage. This reacquisition returned the developer to a position of owning more than fifty percent of the condominium units.
Later in August, 1986, Hamptons Development sought a declaration from the Division that the condominium control turnover provision of section 718.301(l)(a) should not be triggered by the 1984 conveyance of more than fifty percent of the units, urging that a more equitable result would be achieved by construing the statutory phrase “conveyed to purchasers” to exclude the type of “temporary” conveyance which occurred under the facts of this case, or by employing a “relation back theory.”
Rejecting the developer’s entreaty the Division Director ruled:
According to the statute set forth above, unit owners other than the developer “are entitled” to elect at least a majority of the board of administration three years after 50% of the units in the condominium have been conveyed to purchasers. There is no exception contained in the statute which provides for a reacquisition of developer entitlement to control once a 50% sellout is achieved and three years elapses, and the developer subsequently reacquires 50% of the units. Rather, once this figure is achieved, unit owners other than the developer become entitled to elect a majority of the board of administration. To interpret the statute in such a manner as to provide an exception where none currently exists would generate wholesale uncertainty in the operation of the turnover provisions of Chapter 718. Moreover, according to the declaratory statement issued by the Division in Bay Yacht Club Condominium Association, Inc., once the developer by statute loses the right to elect a majority of the board, that developer may not regain control of the association. [Footnote omitted.]
We agree with the Division’s interpretation of the statute.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Outrigger Beach Club Condo. Ass'n, Inc. v. Bluegreen Vacations Unlimited, Inc. (Fla. 5th DCA 2022)…veloper. See Cail, 1996 WL 33664301 at *1 n.7 (“Once turnover is triggered, it may never be undone, and unit owners are thereafter entitled to majority representation.” (citing Hamptons Dev. Corp. v. Div. of Fla. Land Sales, Condos., & Mobile Homes, 519 So. 2d 661 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988))). Both the trial court and Appellees maintain that the final sentence in section 718.301(1) supports the notion that only the original, relinquishing developer is prohibited from reacquiring control post-turnover; however, in my…
-
Glazer v. Bluegreen Vacations Unlimited, Inc. (Fla. 5th DCA 2022)…veloper. See Cail, 1996 WL 33664301 at *1 n.7 (“Once turnover is triggered, it may never be undone, and unit owners are thereafter entitled to majority representation.” (citing Hamptons Dev. Corp. v. Div. of Fla. Land Sales, Condos., & Mobile Homes, 519 So. 2d 661 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988))). Both the trial court and Appellees maintain that the final sentence in section 718.301(1) supports the notion that only the original, relinquishing developer is prohibited from reacquiring control post-turnover; however, in my…