Blogs & Resources

During the construction and initial sales of units within a condominium association, the developer will manage the association’s operations and governance. This means the developer controls the association’s board of directors. Once the development is constructed and a certain percentage of the units are sold, then turnover of control of the association to the unit owners must occur. What follows is an overview of what every condominium owner should know about developer turnover of the association.

One of the most critical events a homeowners’ association will face is the “transition” or “turnover” of the association from the developer of the community to the homeowners of the community. However, many homeowners and purchasers may be unaware of what the process of turnover entails, or even what turnover of the community really means. “Transition” or “turnover” of the association means that homeowners in the community are entitled to elect at least a majority of the members of the board of directors of the homeowners’ association.

The Supreme Court of Florida in Bartram v. U.S. Bank Nat. Ass’n, 2016 WL 6538647 (Fla. 2016) held that prior acceleration in a foreclosure action that was involuntarily dismissed was revoked by the involuntary dismissal, and therefore did not trigger the statute of limitations to bar future foreclosure actions. Additionally, the Court held in Singleton v. Greymar Assoc., 882 So. 2d 1004 (Fla. 2004) that the res judicata analysis applies equally to statute of limitations defenses and doesn’t prohibit the re-filing of a foreclosure action that was previously dismissed so long as the second foreclosure action is predicated on a subsequent default. At first glance, this decision appears to have broad application to any type of secured installment debt. If Bartram is broadly applied it could breathe life into ancient debt that was long ago considered time barred by commercial lenders. However, there are distinctions that may limit the application of Bartram to residential mortgage foreclosures. Future appellate decisions will address how broadly Bartram should be applied. This article addresses the best argument for narrow application and the best argument for broad application. If Bartram is applied broadly it could serve as a basis for commercial lenders to re-evaluate mortgages in default in which they previously declined to foreclose. It could also serve as a basis for commercial lenders to re-evaluate corporate policy directed toward secured property that currently has little value or corporate policy directed toward junior mortgages with current value that is insufficient to cover the senior lienholder.

In a perfect world, all loans would be performing, and the lead bank and participant would share in the profits of a loan participation with minimal risk of loss. In the real world, a promising participation loan easily becomes a problem loan, and the lead bank and participant bank can find themselves embroiled in litigation against each other. Such litigation puts a substantial strain on the lead bank’s resources to enforce the loan documents against the defaulted debtor, at a time when the parties should be sharing resources for loss mitigation. One common reason a participant may sue a lead bank after borrower default is based upon the participant’s assessment of collectability. If the participant determines that the collateral is worthless or the borrower is otherwise judgment-proof, the participant may look to the lead bank to recover its share of participation in the failed loan.

Jimerson Birr’s Florida Condominium Law Blog is referenced regarding legislative updates to Florida law.

Featured in the December 2016 Issue Partner’s Perspective: Skills in the Arena of Life J&C Celebrates E-Discovery Day New Law Blogs Curiosities, Ruminations and Various Eccentricities of Firm Biz Click to read.

As discussed in Part I of this blog series, some of the most qualified candidates for employment are often current or former employees of competitors in your industry. Non-compete agreements are helpful to employers who wish to control and limit the competitive activities that an employee may engage in after his or her employment ends. Once an employer has decided to offer employment to a current or former employee of a competitor, these are the most important considerations to make.

While a case is being litigated, the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure provide that a party may take the deposition of any person. When deposing a corporate party on general issues, the business designates a corporate representative to speak for it. However, parties deposing corporations, in all variety of cases, will sometimes demand that the president, CEO, or another high-ranking official sit for deposition. These employees are commonly referred to as “apex employees.” Obviously, these high-ranking officers of the company will sometimes have information relevant to the case. However, sometimes a party will seek to depose an opposing party’s apex employee simply to inconvenience and/or harass him, or in order to gain a tactical advantage: the officer may have to disrupt a busy schedule, or may have to travel a great distance at a substantial cost. The deposing party may also try to somehow embarrass the officer, which could potentially damage the company.

Featured in the November 2016 Issue Partner’s Perspective: Live Like a Lion Christopher Cobb Elected Chair of Florida CILB J&C to Host Open House for E-Discovery Day Jimerson and Meadows to Teach Lender Policy Webinar New Law Blogs Curiosities, Ruminations and Various Eccentricities of Firm Biz Click to read.

A Community Development District (“CDD”) is a governmental unit created to serve the long-term specific needs of a community. Created under Chapter 190 of the Florida Statutes, a CDD’s main powers are to plan, finance, construct, operate and maintain community-wide infrastructure and services specifically for the benefit of its residents. There are over 600 CDD’s in Florida and many of the current CDD’s were established between the housing boom of 2003-2008. Part 1 of this 4 part blog will discuss general aspects and considerations of CDDs in Florida.