Florida HOA Lawyer Blog
The firm’s Nicole R. Kurtz authored an article that appeared as a “Board of Contributors” guest column in today’s edition of the Daily Business Review, South Florida’s exclusive business daily and official court newspaper. The article, which was titled “Disputed Condo Election Offers Important Lessons for Association Boards,” focused on a recent appellate ruling that illustrated the importance for boards of directors to act with a clear understanding of their capabilities to alter association election procedures. Her article reads:
Allegations of questionable or even downright fraudulent tactics by candidates in annual association elections are not entirely uncommon. When suspicious activities begin to call into question the integrity of the election, some boards of directors hit the panic button and take actions that will not stand the test of their governing documents or the Florida Administrative Code.
Such appears to be what took place in a disputed election at the Palm Aire Country Club Condominium in Pompano Beach that culminated in a recent ruling by Florida’s Fourth District Court of Appeal. While the appellate panel’s opinion does not address the reasons for the association board’s actions, noting only that “there is some ambiguity as to what exactly occurred” at the board’s Feb. 29, 2016, meeting, the opinion essentially invalidates the board’s 6-3 vote at the meeting to postpone the annual election that was set for two days later on March 2.
Even though a majority of the board voted to postpone the election, it took place as originally scheduled on March 2, and new directors were elected. The management company for the property, M&M Property Management LLC, subsequently refused to recognize the authority of the prior board of directors and instead began working with the newly elected directors.
In response, the prior board of directors filed suit against M&M seeking a temporary injunction to compel the management company to stop operating in service of the new board of directors. The prior board was granted the temporary injunction, and in turn M&M was ordered to recognize the board as it existed prior to the March 2 election.
