Case Title: Susan Cohn V. The Grand Condominium Association, Inc., Et Al.

Citation: 

Docket Number: SC10-430

State: florida

Court: Florida Supreme Court

Date: 2011-03-31T00:00:00Z

Document:
Supreme Court of Florida 
 
 
____________ 
 
No. SC10-430 
____________ 
 
SUSAN COHN,  
Appellant, 
 
vs. 
 
THE GRAND CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC., et al, 
Appellees. 
 
[March 31, 2011] 
 
PER CURIAM. 
 
This case is before the Court on appeal from a decision of the Third District 
Court of Appeal, Cohn v. Grand Condominium Ass’n, 26 So. 3d 8 (Fla. 3d DCA 
2009), which held a state statute unconstitutionally applied to impair the parties’ 
contract in violation of article I, section 10 of the Florida Constitution.1  We affirm.   
 
Organized in 1986, The Grand Condominium is a mixed-use condominium 
comprising 810 residential units, 259 commercial units, and 141 retail units.  The 
Grand’s articles of incorporation, declaration of condominium, and bylaws provide 
for a seven-member board of directors governing the association, with two 
                                         
1.  We have jurisdiction.  See art. V, § 3(b)(1), Fla. Const.   
 
- 2 - 
members each elected by the residential unit owners, the commercial unit owners, 
and the retail unit owners, and the seventh member elected at-large.   
 
In 1995, the Legislature enacted section 718.404, Florida Statutes, regulating 
mixed-use condominiums.  Ch. 95-274, § 38, Laws of Fla.  Section 718.404(2) 
established that in mixed-use condominiums with fifty percent or greater 
residential composition, the residential unit owners must be entitled to vote for a 
majority of seats on the board of directors.  In 2007, the Legislature amended 
section 718.404(2) to make it retroactive, adding, “This subsection shall apply 
retroactively as a remedial measure.”  Ch. 2007-173, § 5, Laws of Fla.   
Susan Cohn, a residential unit owner at The Grand, then requested that The 
Grand change its voting system accordingly.  The Grand filed a declaratory 
judgment action, seeking a declaration that subsection 718.404(2) constituted an 
unconstitutional impairment of contract as applied to The Grand.  The trial court 
granted summary judgment in The Grand’s favor, holding that the retroactivity 
provision was unconstitutional under article I, section 10 of the Florida 
Constitution, and the Third District affirmed.  
In Florida, a condominium regime may be created only under chapter 718, 
the Condominium Act.  § 718.104, Fla. Stat. (1985).  A condominium is 
established by recording a declaration of condominium, which is the document that 
governs the condominium and is binding on all unit owners.  See §§ 718.104(2)-
 
- 3 - 
(7), Fla. Stat. (1985).  A declaration of condominium possesses “attributes of a 
covenant running with the land” and operates as a contract among unit owners and 
the association, “spelling out mutual rights and obligations of the parties thereto.”  
Woodside Vill. Condo. Ass’n v. Jahren, 806 So. 2d 452, 456 (Fla. 2002) (quoting 
Pepe v. Whispering Sands Condo. Ass’n, 351 So. 2d 755, 757 (Fla. 2d DCA 
1977)).   
Here, The Grand’s declaration establishes that the retail and commercial unit 
owners, collectively, shall have majority vote control over the board of the 
directors.  The Grand’s declaration, which was filed in 1986, adopts the terms of 
“the Condominium Act of the State of Florida (Florida Statute 718, et seq.) in 
effect as of the date of recording this Declaration” and does not contain “as 
amended from time to time” language subjecting it to future statutory changes to 
the Condominium Act.  See Angora Enters., Inc. v. Condo. Ass’n of Lakeside 
Vill., 796 F.2d 384, 386 (11th Cir. 1986) (noting that express agreement by parties 
in the declaration of condominium regarding application of future statutes to the 
association may determine whether parties have a “constitutional protection against 
future amendments to the Florida Condominium Act which, absent such an 
agreement, might arguably impair a party’s contract obligation”); Sans Souci v. 
Div. of Fla. Land Sales & Condos., 421 So. 2d 623, 628 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982) 
(“[F]or purposes of considering whether there has been an unconstitutional 
 
- 4 - 
impairment of a contractual obligation by statutes regulating condominiums, . . . 
there must be determined the date of filing of the superior declaration of 
condominium and its subordinate documents, such as the master sublease, since 
such date controls for purposes of fixing the parties’ rights and obligations.”).  
Therefore, by changing the distribution of voting power, the retroactive application 
of section 718.404(2) would alter the rights of The Grand’s unit owners in 
contravention of their contractual agreement.   
Article I, section 10 of the Florida Constitution prohibits the enactment of 
any “law impairing the obligation of contracts.”  Accordingly, because section 
718.404(2) impairs the obligation of contract as applied to The Grand, we affirm 
the holding of the Third District below.  See Pomponio v. Claridge of Pompano 
Condo., Inc., 378 So. 2d 774, 776 (Fla. 1979) (discussing “the principle that all 
laws impairing the obligations of contract are constitutionally prohibited”); 
Dewberry v. Auto-Owners Ins. Co., 363 So. 2d 1077, 1080 (Fla. 1978) (“It is 
axiomatic that subsequent legislation which diminishes the value of a contract is 
repugnant to our Constitution.”)  
It is so ordered. 
CANADY, C.J., and PARIENTE, LEWIS, QUINCE, POLSTON, LABARGA, 
and PERRY, JJ., concur. 
 
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION, AND 
IF FILED, DETERMINED. 
 
 
- 5 - 
An Appeal from the District Court of Appeal – Statutory or Constitutional 
Invalidity 
 
 
Third District - Case No. 3D08-3051 
 
 
(Dade County) 
 
Eric M. Glazer of Glazer & Associates, P.A., Hollywood, Florida 
 
 
for Appellant 
 
Daniel S. Rosenbaum, Joseph William Janssen, III, Richard Chambers Valuntas, 
and Mark Gerald Keegan of Rosenbaum Mollengarden Janssen & Siracusa, PLLC, 
West Palm Beach, Florida; and H. Hugh McConnell of Siegfried, Rivera, Lerner, 
De La Torre & Sobel, P.A., Coral Gables, Florida, 
 
 
for Appellees