Jamlynn Investments Corp. v. San Marco Residences of Marco Condominium Ass'n, Inc., 88-03593

Decision Date09 June 1989
Docket NumberNo. 88-03593,88-03593
Citation14 Fla. L. Weekly 1404,544 So.2d 1080
Parties14 Fla. L. Weekly 1404 JAMLYNN INVESTMENTS CORP., d/b/a Alpine Restaurant & Deli, Appellant, v. SAN MARCO RESIDENCES OF MARCO CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC., Appellee.
CourtFlorida District Court of Appeals

Ronald S. Webster of Rhodes & Tucker, Marco Island, for appellant.

Leonard P. Reina of Forsyth, Swalm & Brugger, Naples, for appellee.

RYDER, Acting Chief Judge.

Appellant/defendant, Jamlynn Investments Corp., d/b/a Alpine Restaurant & Deli, challenges a nonfinal order denying its motion for temporary injunction against appellee/plaintiff, San Marco Condominium Association, Inc. The trial court denied the motion on the ground that Jamlynn lacked standing to file the motion for temporary injunction. We reverse.

Alpine Restaurant & Deli is located in San Marco Residences, a mixed use condominium. Jamlynn purchased the Alpine business from William and Lottie Tedio and, as a condition of the purchase, entered into a commercial lease/option to buy agreement with the Tedios for the condominium property in which Alpine is located. Jamlynn leased the premises subject to the condominium declaration, rules and regulations, and agreed to comply with all existing and future condominium rules and regulations.

The Condominium Association filed a complaint seeking an injunction against Jamlynn, alleging Alpine was violating various provisions of the condominium declaration, the Condominium Association's bylaws, rules and regulations, and the county's zoning ordinances. The complaint stated that Article III of the condominium declaration allows use of condominium space as a deli, and one allegation was that there was a disproportionate use of parking spaces by Alpine's customers and employees.

Jamlynn's answer denied the allegation that Alpine used too many parking spaces, and counterclaimed to obtain declaratory and injunctive relief. Jamlynn alleged that the Condominium Association's attempt to amend the condominium declaration to limit the commercial unit owner's use of forty-seven limited common element parking spaces, to which it is entitled under the recorded prospectus and condominium declaration, would cause irreparable harm and violated the condominium prospectus and declaration.

In its answer to Jamlynn's counterclaim, the Condominium Association generally denied the allegation regarding the parking spaces and denied that Jamlynn had an actual, present, and adverse interest in the subject matter before the court. Jamlynn then filed a motion for temporary injunction, alleging that the Association's threats to eliminate the parking spaces as limited common elements and reassign them to individual unit owners would cause Jamlynn irreparable harm from lost income because its customers would be denied access to Alpine.

During the hearing on the motion for temporary injunction, the Condominium Association argued that Jamlynn did not have standing to prevent the Association from amending its documents because Jamlynn was not a condominium unit owner. The trial court denied Jamlynn's motion on the ground it did not have standing, relying upon Backus v. Smith, 364 So.2d 786 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978).

We find that Backus and the other cases cited by appellee are distinguishable and do not control the disposition of this case. Backus involved, inter alia, the dismissal of the plaintiffs' count against a condominium association for tortious interference with a contractual relationship, not an injunction. In that case, the association refused to permit the sale of a condominium during a meeting where the association failed to follow procedural requirements set forth in the condominium declaration and the association's bylaws. The appellate court affirmed the dismissal of the count on the reasoning that because plaintiffs...

To continue reading

Request your trial
11 cases
  • Pet Supermarket, Inc. v. Eldridge
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • May 10, 2023
    ... ... Power ... Network Corp. v. JEA , 327 So.3d 412, 415 (Fla. 1st DCA ... Invs. Corp. v. San Marco Residences of Marco Condo ... Ass'n , 544 ... ...
  • Guardianship of Medley, In re
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • December 12, 1990
    ...may have standing to sue the trustee for mismanagement of the trust). See also Jamlynn Investments Corp. v. San Marco Residences of Marco Condominium Ass'n, Inc., 544 So.2d 1080, 1082 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989) ("The concept of standing has been defined in a broad sense as having a sufficient stake......
  • Equity Resources, Inc. v. County of Leon
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • September 8, 1994
    ...at stake in the controversy that will be affected by the outcome of the litigation. See generally, Jamlynn Inv. Corp. v. San Marco Residences, 544 So.2d 1080, 1082 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989); Geiger v. Sun First Nat'l Bank of Orlando, 427 So.2d 815, 817 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983). In the context of an equ......
  • Pirate's Treasure, Inc. v. City of Dunedin
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • August 16, 2019
    ...at stake in the controversy which will be affected by the outcome of the litigation." Jamlynn Invs. Corp. v. San Marco Residences of Marco Condo. Ass'n, 544 So. 2d 1080, 1082 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989) ; see also Gen. Dev. Corp. v. Kirk, 251 So. 2d 284, 286 (Fla. 2d DCA 1971) ("Standing is, in the ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT