ADANAN JAVAN, SINGER 5070, LLC, SINGER 5070 2, LLC, SEAWINDS 20D SOUTH, LLC AND SEAWINDS 10D SOUTH, LLC
v.
SEAWINDS SOUTH CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC.
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.
The court affirmed the circuit court's order dismissing count 1 of the complaint and referring it to mandatory nonbinding arbitration under Florida Statutes § 718.1255. However, the court remanded because the circuit court's written order inadvertently referred both counts to arbitration, when only count 1 qualified, and the court had not yet ruled on the motion to dismiss count 2.
The court affirmed the dismissal of count 1 and its referral to mandatory nonbinding arbitration as required by § 718.1255. The court remanded to correct the circuit court's written order to reflect that only count 1 was subject to mandatory arbitration, and remanded for the court to enter a ruling on the motion to dismiss count 2, which had been fully argued but not ruled upon.
[1] A complaint alleging that a condominium governing body failed to provide adequate notice of meetings states a 'dispute' subject to mandatory nonbinding arbitration under…
Previewing 1 of 1 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“Prior to the institution of court litigation, a party to a dispute shall petition the [D]ivision [of Florida Condominiums, Timeshares, and Mobile Homes of the Department of Business and Professional Regulation] for nonbinding arbitration.”
Section 718.1255(4)(a) statutory requirement establishing mandatory arbitration procedure
Appellants filed a complaint with two counts against appellees in a condominium-related dispute. Count 1 alleged a dispute involving the governing bod…
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 Motion To Dismiss cases and more on FLexlaw
GERBER, J.
We affirm without discussion the circuit court’s order granting appellees’ motion to dismiss count 1 of appellants’ complaint and referring that count to mandatory nonbinding arbitration pursuant to section 718.1255, Florida Statutes (2019). See § 718.1255(4)(a), Fla. Stat. (2019) (“Prior to the institution of court litigation, a party to a dispute shall petition the [D]ivision [of Florida Condominiums, Timeshares, and Mobile Homes of the Department of Business and Professional Regulation] for nonbinding arbitration.”) (emphasis added); § 718.1255(1)(b)2.-3., Fla. Stat. (2019) (“As used in this section, the term ‘dispute’ means any disagreement between two or more parties that involves … [t]he failure of a governing body, when required by this chapter or an association document, to … [g]ive adequate notice of meetings or other actions … [or] [p]roperly conduct meetings ….”).
However, to the extent the circuit court’s written order inadvertently referred both counts of appellants’ complaint to mandatory nonbinding arbitration – contrary to appellees’ hearing concession that count 2 of the appellants’ complaint does not allege a “dispute” as defined in section 718.1255(1) and, therefore, is not subject to mandatory nonbinding arbitration under section 718.1255 – we remand for the circuit court to enter a new written order, limiting its disposition of appellees’ motion to dismiss to only count 1 of appellants’ complaint.
We further observe that, although the parties fully argued appellees’ motion to dismiss count 2 of appellants’ complaint, the circuit court has not entered a ruling thereon. Because the circuit court has not entered that ruling, our review of those arguments would be premature. Thus, we also remand for the circuit court to review the record and hearing transcript, and enter its ruling on appellees’ motion to dismiss count 2 of appellants’ complaint.
Affirmed in part, remanded in part with instructions. CONNER and KLINGENSMITH, JJ., concur. * * * Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.