HomeMy WebLinkAbout0848 owners, then the Association can be sued as a defendant as a i
class action on behalf of all unit owners. The Defendant con-
s
tends that there is no common interest because some of the unit `
owners do not rent their lots; never rented their lots, and
never intend to do so. While the testimony established that
this is the case as to some lot owners, nevertheless, testimony ;
establishes that in 1976, 600 lots in this condominium were ;
available to rent by the Plaintiff. In 1977, 450 lots were
' i
available, in 1978, approximately 300 lots, and in 1979, between '
300 and 350 lots were available for rent by the Plaintiff. In
addition, Article XI of the Declaration of Condominium qives
the developer the exclusive right to rent all of the lots in this
condominium in the absence of use by the owner or his designated
guests, and this exclusive right of the developer to rent is
binding on each member, his successors and assiqns, and consti-
tutes a covenant running with the land of each condominium unit.
Therefore, the possible rental of all of the units constitutes
a matter of common interest to all of the lot owners, since this
is a provision that affects each present lot owner and all
j successor lot owners for a period of ninet,y-nine years. The
; .
; primary purpose of cldss actions is to prevent a multiplicity
i
~ of suits over the same issues and to not require the joinder of
€
€ ,
j every person who is affected where it is impractical to do so.
[
~ In this condominium, there are 1,585 lots, all of which are
~
~ affected by Article XI. At this point, it should be noted that
~
~ .
~ there has already been one previovs lawsuit filed cQncerning
~
~ Artic.le XI, the case of Outdpor Resorts of America, Inc. v.
M
~ Erskine, Case No. 76-911-CA, in the Circuit Court in and for St.
~ _
~ Lucie County, Florida. This case was against several individual
~
~ lot owners. The current president of the Condominium Association
testified that the Association tried to inform all of the lot
;
owners of this decision. In spite of this decision, the evidence
~ shows that many of the individual lot owners have ignored this
~ '
decision and have rented their lots direct to third parties, with
S;
~ the individual lot flwners collecting and keeping all of the rents
k~
i~
~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
r';
Y '
~ _ U ~ ~j~~ _
= 9QG! c.H.15 ~At;~' 847
~ '
~_v , _