Powell v. River Ranch Property Owners Ass'n, Inc.
| Decision Date | 19 February 1988 |
| Docket Number | No. 87-1188,87-1188 |
| Citation | 13 Fla. L. Weekly 493,522 So.2d 69 |
| Parties | 13 Fla. L. Weekly 493 Charles R. POWELL, Appellant, v. RIVER RANCH PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC., and William J. Page, Appellees. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
David A. Monaco of Cobb & Cole, Daytona Beach, for appellant.
John W. Frost, II and Loula M. Fuller of Frost & Purcell, P.A., Bartow, for Appellee River Ranch Property Owners Ass'n, Inc.
No appearance by William J. Page.
The appellant, Charles R. Powell, seeks review of an order of the circuit court dismissing with prejudice the class action counts of his amended complaint.
The appellant contends that the allegations of his amended complaint if taken as true are sufficient to establish the elements necessary under Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.220 to maintain a class action. We agree.
Powell alleges that he represents a group of 3200 absentee land owners who own property within an unrecorded subdivision in Polk County, consisting of approximately 55,000 acres. The subject property is known as River Ranch Acres. Powell alleges that the appellee, River Ranch Property Owners Association, consisting of 4000 members, is basically a hunt club open to membership of any property owner of River Ranch Acres and that the appellee has fenced the property, thereby limiting its use to the club members, allowing trespass upon nonmembers' property and denying access to property owners unless they are members of the association.
The appellee contends that a class action suit cannot properly be maintained because the facts involved in each land owner's claim vary with regard to each parcel of property.
Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.220 sets forth the prerequisites for maintenance of a class action. That rule was completely revised in 1980 to bring it in line with modern practice and is based on Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. We follow the federal construction and application where appropriate. Lingelbach's Bavarian Restaurants, Inc. v. Del Bello, 467 So.2d 476 (Fla. 2d DCA), review denied, 476 So.2d 674 (Fla.1985).
Federal Rule 23 and, by analogy, Florida Rule 1.220, do not require that class certification be denied merely because the claim of one or more class representatives arises in a factual context that varies somewhat from that of other plaintiffs. Cox v. American Cast Iron Pipe Co., 784 F.2d 1546 (11th Cir.1986), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 883, 107 S.Ct. 274, 93 L.Ed.2d 250 ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Sosa v. Safeway Premium Fin. Co.
...claims and whether the claims are based on the same legal theory. See Morgan, 33 So.3d at 64 (citing Powell v. River Ranch Prop. Owners Ass'n, Inc., 522 So.2d 69, 70 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988)). The threshold of the commonality requirement is not high. See Broin v. Philip Morris Cos., Inc., 641 So.......
-
Broin v. Philip Morris Companies, Inc.
...class representative arises in a factual context that varies somewhat from that of other plaintiffs." Powell v. River Ranch Property Owners Ass'n, Inc., 522 So.2d 69, 70 (Fla. 2d DCA), review denied, 531 So.2d 1354 (Fla.1988); Pottinger, 720 F.Supp. at 958. The class in this case meets the ......
-
Estate of Bobinger v. Deltona Corp.
...the rule are usually referred to as the principles of numerosity, commonality, typicality and adequacy. See Powell v. River Ranch Property Owners Ass'n, 522 So.2d 69 (Fla. 2d DCA), review denied, 531 So.2d 1354 (Fla.1988); Paradise Shores Apartments, Inc. v. Practical Maintenance Co., 344 S......
-
Tire Kingdom, Inc. v. Dishkin
...same practice or course of conduct that gave rise to the other claims, and whether the claims are based on the same legal theory.” Powell, 522 So.2d at 70; see also Olen Props. Corp. v. Moss, 981 So.2d 515, 520 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008); Braun, 827 So.2d at 267. As we interpret the order under re......
-
Considerations in class certification.
...courts apply federal construction and application of Rule 23 where appropriate. Powell v. River Ranch Property Owners Assn., Inc., 522 So. 2d 69 (Fla. 2d D.C.A. 1988). Consequently, this article incorporates federal interpretations of Fed. R. Civ. P. 23. (3) It is important to note that at ......