VERONICA ROSS-WILLIAMS, ETC.
v.
LINDA LEALI, RECEIVER
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.
A receiver appointed under Florida's proceedings supplementary statute (section 56.10) lacks authority to continue or expand the receivership beyond satisfaction of the underlying judgment, and cannot assume plenary operational control of a condominium association absent separate statutory authorization.
[1] A post-judgment receivership initiated under Florida's proceedings supplementary statute terminates upon satisfaction of the underlying judgment.
[2] The statutory authority for a post-judgment receiver under Florida Statutes section 56.10 ceases once the judgment it was appointed to satisfy has been paid.
Previewing 2 of 5 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“Once the outstanding judgment is satisfied, the statutory authority for a post-judgment receiver logically ceases, because the purpose for this statutory receivership – marshalling and managing the debtor's assets to pay the outstanding judgment – ceases.”
Establishes that the statutory basis for a section 56.10 receivership terminates upon judgment satisfaction.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceCasa Financial Holdings obtained a $72,805 judgment against Brookview Association, a condominium association, and sought a receiver under section 56.1…
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.
Third District Court of Appeal
State of Florida
Opinion filed April 27, 2022. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________
No. 3D21-2259 Lower Tribunal No. 18-26185
________________
Veronica Ross-Williams, etc., et al.,
Appellants,
vs.
Linda Leali, Receiver,
Appellee.
An Appeal from a non-final order from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Barbara Areces, Judge. Keystone Law Firm, P.A., and Frank Wolland and Eliezer S. Poupko, for appellants. Haber Law, P.A., and Steven W. Davis, for appellee. Before LOGUE, SCALES and GORDO, JJ. SCALES, J. Appellants Veronica Ross-Williams, Jalyl Hausaf, Alex Hernandez, Jonathan Madden and Claudette Doyley (together, Appellants) appeal an October 19, 2021 trial court order (the “Order”) that granted appellee Linda Leali’s motion to broaden the scope her receivership of a condominium association. We reverse the Order because the receivership was authorized and initiated pursuant to Florida’s proceedings supplementary statute, and the receiver’s principal duty was to satisfy an outstanding judgment of a creditor of the association; therefore, broadening the receivership after the judgment was satisfied constituted reversible error.
I. Facts
The facts in this case are not disputed. In January 2019, a $72,805 money judgment was entered against Brookview Association, Inc. (“Brookview”), a 99-unit condominium association governed by chapter 718 of the Florida Statutes. The judgment was assigned to Casa Financial Holdings, LLC (“Casa Financial”) in August 2021. Casa Financial obtained a Judgment Lien Certificate and had the Clerk of the Circuit Court issue a writ of execution.
Brookview did not pay the judgment, so on September2, 2021, Casa Financial, pursuant to sections 56.10 and 56.29 of the Florida Statutes, filed a post-judgment motion seeking to invoke proceedings supplementary and have a receiver appointed for Brookview. Casa Financial’s motion sought a post-judgment “receivership [that] would be the least disruptive method of collection and is less harsh than either garnishment of [Brookview’s] operating funds or levy upon [Brookview’s] assets.” The trial court granted Casa Financial’s receivership motion and commenced proceedings supplementary. On September 13, 2021, the trial court entered a post-judgment receivership order, appointing a receiver for Brookview. The order specifically acknowledges that the receivership is authorized by sections 56.10 and 56.29. While this receivership order gives the receiver broad powers over Brookview, importantly, the order contains the following limitation language: “This is a post judgment receivership. Therefore, the primary fiduciary duty of the Receiver is to make payment to the judgment creditor in the above-captioned matter.” On October5, 2021, the receiver, having become aware that one of Brookview’s officers would be satisfying Casa Financial’s judgment, filed an ex-parte motion in the proceedings supplementary seeking to expand her duties well beyond those necessary to satisfy Casa Financial’s judgment. The receiver’s motion and accompanying affidavit expressly acknowledged the impending satisfaction of Casa Financial’s judgment, yet the receiver, noting numerous concerns with operations of Brookview unrelated to Casa Financial’s outstanding judgment, requested the trial court to broaden the receivership to provide the receiver plenary authority over Brookview, with all powers and remedies granted a condominium association under chapter 718. On October 6, 2021, Casa Financial filed a notice of satisfaction of its judgment.1 The following day, the president of Brookview’s board filed an emergency motion to discharge the receiver.
Rather than discharging the receiver, the trial court, on October 19, 2021, entered the Order which had been appended to the receiver’s motion as a proposed order. The Order gave the receiver “full operational authority of and for the Association.” As in the initial post-judgment receivership order, the Order grants the receiver full judicial immunity and requires the posting of no bond. The Order provides no end date for the receivership. Appellants, who are members of Brookview’s board of directors, timely appealed the Order. We entered a stay of the Order pending the outcome of this appeal.
II. Discussion2
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Puma Enters. Corp. v. Vitale, 566 So. 2d 1343 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990)
- Granada Lakes Villas Condo. Ass'n, Inc. v. Metro-Dade Invs. Co., 125 So. 3d 756 (Fla. 2013)