Kaufman v. Shere
| Decision Date | 03 May 1977 |
| Docket Number | No. 76-1429,76-1429 |
| Citation | 347 So.2d 627 |
| Parties | Sam KAUFMAN et al., Appellants, v. Ralph H. SHERE and Inez Shere, his wife, Appellees. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Becker & Poliakoff and George I. Platt, Miami Beach, for appellants.
Patton, Kanner, Nadeau, Segal, Zeller & LaPorte, Miami, for appellees.
Before PEARSON, BARKDULL and NATHAN, JJ.
This is an interlocutory appeal and cross appeal from a partial summary judgment in a class action challenging the validity of a Rent Adjustment or "escalation" clause in a condominium recreation lease. The plaintiff Kaufmans are unit owners in Fifth Moorings Condominium and plaintiff Fifth Morrings Condominium, Inc., is the condominium association. Defendants Ralph Shere and the late Inez Shere, his wife, were officers and directors of the corporation which developed the Fifth Moorings Condominium, which is part of a complex that includes seven other condominiums. Defendants were also the lessors of the recreational facilities, which serve the entire Moorings complex.
The lease was assumed by all unit owners as a mandatory condition for purchasing their condominiums. In May of 1974, defendants demanded an increase in rent pursuant to the escalation clause, which calls for periodic rent adjustments in accordance with the Consumer Price Index. Plaintiffs initiated this action on July 1, 1975, seeking, inter alia, declaratory relief with respect to their rights and obligations under Florida Statutes § 711.236, which became law on June 5, 1975. Essentially, that section of the Condominium Act declares escalation clauses in condominium recreation leases void for public policy and prohibits their enforcement.
The trial judge did not pass on the constitutionality of retroactive application of Section 711.236, since he found that the legislature had declared escalation clauses to be unenforceable prospectively only. He also ruled that the Declaration of Condominium by which Fifth Moorings Condominium was created and governed had provided for the adoption of future legislative acts as amendments to the Declaration and that Section 711.236 should therefore be given prospective operation and effect with respect to the Fifth Moorings Condominium.
In accordance with these findings, the trial court granted a partial summary judgment allowing the rent increase of May 21, 1974, but prohibiting any further rent escalations after June 4, 1975. Plaintiffs appealed the upholding of the May, 1974 increase, arguing that Section 711.236 should be applied retroactively. Defendants have cross appealed, asserting that Section 711.236 is unconstitutional and that the Declaration of Condominium should not be interpreted as incorporating the provisions of Section 711.236.
With regard to plaintiffs' argument that Section 711.236 should be applied retroactively, we find that the Florida Supreme Court's recent ruling in Fleeman v. Case, 342 So.2d 815 (Fla.1977), is completely dispositive of this question. The Court there ruled that Section 711.236 is inapplicable to contracts which antedate its enactment. Thus, the trial judge properly refused to invalidate the rent increase of May 21, 1974, which occurred before the effective date of the statute.
The only remaining question is whether the Declaration of Condominium of Fifth Moorings was properly interpreted as including the prospective invalidation of escalation clauses mandated by Section 711.236.
The critical contested provision of the Declaration reads as follows:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Sans Souci v. Division of Florida Land Sales and Condominiums, Dept. of Business Regulation, AG-137
...Coral Isle East Condominium v. Snyder, 395 So.2d 1204 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981), rev. denied, 407 So.2d 1105 (Fla.1981); and Kaufman v. Shere, 347 So.2d 627 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977), cert. denied, 355 So.2d 517 9 See Mandelkorn, Krul & Galt, Condominium Litigation, 33 U.Miami L.Rev. 911, 926-934 (1979).......
-
Steinhardt v. Rudolph
...case, the declaration of condominium specifically adopts the Florida Condominium Act and all future amendments thereto. Kaufman v. Shere, 347 So.2d 627 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977), cert. denied, 355 So.2d 517 (Fla.1978); see also Century Village, Inc. v. Wellington E, F, K, L, H, J, M & G, Condomini......
-
Condominium Ass'n of Plaza Towers North, Inc. v. Plaza Recreation Development Corp.
...Century Village, Inc. v. Wellington, E, F, K, L, H, J, M & G Condominium Ass'n, 361 So.2d 128, 132-33 (Fla.1978); Kaufman v. Shere, 347 So.2d 627 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977), cert. denied, 355 So.2d 517 Second, although the declaration of condominium for the property covered by the subject recreatio......
-
Century Village, Inc. v. Wellington, E, F, K, L, H, J, M, and G, Condominium Ass'n
...incorporated by reference. This holding is consistent with that reached by the Third District Court of Appeal in Kaufman v. Shere, 347 So.2d 627 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977), cert. den., 355 So.2d 517 (Fla.1978). In that case, the Third District Court interpreted a similar provision, also contained i......
-
Chapter 9-4 Post-Foreclosure
...of the parties to an existing declaration if the declaration specifically incorporates these amendments.") (citing Kaufman v. Shere, 347 So. 2d 627, 628 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977) ("[T]he provisions of the Condominium Act as presently existing, or as it may be amended from time to time, including t......
-
Chapter 9-4 Post-Foreclosure
...of the parties to an existing declaration if the declaration specifically incorporates these amendments.") (citing Kaufman v. Shere, 347 So. 2d 627, 628 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977) ("[T]he provisions of the Condominium Act as presently existing, or as it may be amended from time to time, including t......