Case Title: The Florida Bar Re: Advisory Opinion - Activities of Community Association Managers

Citation: 

Docket Number: SC13-889

State: florida

Court: Florida Supreme Court

Date: 2015-05-14T00:00:00Z

Document:
Supreme Court of Florida 
 
 
____________ 
 
No. SC13-889 
____________ 
 
 
THE FLORIDA BAR RE: ADVISORY OPINION—ACTIVITIES 
OF COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION MANAGERS. 
 
[May 14, 2015] 
 
PER CURIAM. 
 
Pursuant to Rule Regulating the Florida Bar 10-9.1, The Florida Bar Real 
Property, Probate, and Trust Law Section petitioned the Standing Committee on 
Unlicensed Practice of Law (Standing Committee) for an advisory opinion 
regarding certain activities when performed by non-lawyer community association 
managers.  Petitioner asked the Standing Committee to examine a 1996 advisory 
opinion from this Court, Florida Bar re Advisory Opinion–Activities of 
Community Association Managers, 681 So. 2d 1119 (Fla. 1996), and advise 
whether the activities in the opinion that were found to be the unlicensed practice 
of law continue to constitute the unlicensed practice of law.  Further, Petitioner 
asked whether fourteen additional activities, when performed by non-lawyer 
community association managers, constitute the unlicensed practice of law.  As 
 
 
2 
required under rule 10-9.1(f), the Standing Committee provided notice of and held 
a public hearing to address these issues where it considered written and live 
testimony.  The Standing Committee subsequently filed a proposed advisory 
opinion in this Court.  We have jurisdiction to review the proposed advisory 
opinion pursuant to rule 10-9.1(g) of the Rules Regulating the Florida Bar and 
article V, section 15, of the Florida Constitution. 
After the proposed advisory opinion was filed, interested parties were 
permitted to file briefs in support of or in opposition to the proposed advisory 
opinion.  After considering the proposed opinion and the briefs of the interested 
parties, the Court approves the proposed advisory opinion as set forth in the 
appendix to this opinion.1  
It is so ordered. 
LABARGA, C.J., and PARIENTE, LEWIS, QUINCE, CANADY, POLSTON, 
and PERRY, JJ., concur. 
 
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION, AND 
IF FILED, DETERMINED. 
 
Original Proceedings – The Florida Bar 
 
 
 
                                          
 
 
1.  As provided in Rule Regulating the Florida Bar 10-9.1(g)(4), the advisory 
opinion shall have the force and effect of an order of this Court and shall be 
published accordingly. 
 
 
3 
C.C. Abbott, Chair, Standing Committee on the Unlicensed Practice of Law, 
Tallahassee, Florida; Nancy Munjiovi Blount, Past Chair, Standing Committee on 
the Unlicensed Practice of Law, Tallahassee, Florida; John F. Harkness, Jr., 
Executive Director, Lori S. Holcomb, Director, Client Protection, and Jeffrey Todd 
Picker, The Florida Bar, Tallahassee, Florida, 
 
On behalf of the Standing Committee on the Unlicensed Practice of Law 
 
Michael Allen Dribin, Chair, Real Property, Probate and Trust Law Section of The 
Florida Bar, Harper Meyer Perez Hagan O’Connor Albert & Dribin, LLP, Miami, 
Florida; Margaret Ann Rolando, Past Chair, Real Property, Probate and Trust Law 
Section of The Florida Bar, Shutts & Bowen, LLP, Miami, Florida; William F. 
Belcher, Saint Petersburg, Florida, on behalf of the Real Property, Probate and 
Trust Law Section of The Florida Bar; Jennifer Ann Winegardner of The Chase 
Law Firm, Tallahassee, Florida, on behalf of the Continental Group, Inc., 
Associations, Inc., and CEOMC Florida, Inc.; Mauri Ellis Peyton, II and Gian C. 
Ratnapala of PeytonBolin, PL, Fort Lauderdale, Florida, on behalf of Community 
Associations Institute; David Mark Felice, Tampa, Florida, on behalf of Terra 
Management Services, Inc.; Jeffrey Michael Oshinsky, Miami, Florida, on behalf 
of Association Financial Services, L.C.; Mark R. Benson, Community Association 
Manager, Fort Myers, Florida; and Steve Caballero, Community Association 
Manager, Fort Lauderdale, Florida, on behalf of Exclusive Property Management, 
 
Responding 
 
 
 
 
 
 
4 
 
APPENDIX 
 
THE FLORIDA BAR 
STANDING COMMITTEE ON THE  
UNLICENSED PRACTICE OF LAW 
FAO #2012-2, ACTIVITIES OF COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION MANAGERS 
_________________________________________________________________/ 
PROPOSED ADVISORY OPINION 
 
 
 
 
May 15, 2013 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
5 
INTRODUCTION 
Pursuant to rule 10-9 of the Rules Regulating The Florida Bar, The Florida 
Bar’s Real Property, Probate & Trust Law Section petitioned the Standing 
Committee on Unlicensed Practice of Law (“the Standing Committee”) for an 
advisory opinion on the activities of community association managers (“CAMS”).2 
The petitioner sought confirmation that the activities found to be the 
unlicensed practice of law in the 1996 opinion (Florida Bar re: Advisory Opinion–
Activities of Community Association Managers, 681 So. 2d 1119 (Fla. 1996)) 
continue to be the unlicensed practice of law.  Those activities (hereinafter 1996 
opinion) include the following: 
A. 
 drafting of a claim of lien and satisfaction of claim of lien; 
B. 
preparing a notice of commencement; 
C. 
determining the timing, method, and form of giving notices of 
meetings; 
D. 
determining the votes necessary for certain actions by community 
associations; 
E. 
addressing questions asking for the application of a statute or rule; and 
F. 
advising community associations whether a course of action is 
                                          
 
2.  Although the request for opinion addresses CAMS specifically, the 
Standing Committee’s opinion would apply to the activities of any nonlawyer. 
 
 
6 
authorized by statute or rule. 
The petitioner also asked if it was the unlicensed practice of law for a CAM 
to engage in any of the following activities (hereinafter “2012 request”): 
1. 
Preparation of a Certificate of assessments due once the delinquent 
account is turned over to the association’s lawyer;  
2. 
Preparation of a Certificate of assessments due once a foreclosure 
against the unit has commenced; 
3. 
Preparation of Certificate of assessments due once a member disputes 
in writing to the association the amount alleged as owed; 
4. 
Drafting of amendments (and certificates of amendment that are 
recorded in the official records) to declaration of covenants, bylaws, and 
articles of incorporation when such documents are to be voted upon by the 
members; 
5. 
Determination of number of days to be provided for statutory notice; 
6. 
Modification of limited proxy forms promulgated by the State; 
7. 
Preparation of documents concerning the right of the association to 
approve new prospective owners; 
8. 
Determination of affirmative votes needed to pass a proposition or 
amendment to recorded documents; 
9. 
Determination of owners’ votes needed to establish a quorum; 
 
 
7 
10. 
Drafting of pre-arbitration demand letters required by 718.1255, Fla. 
 
Stat.; 
11. 
Preparation of construction lien documents (e.g. notice of 
commencement, and lien waivers, etc.); 
12. 
Preparation, review, drafting and/or substantial involvement in the 
preparation/execution of contracts, including construction contracts, 
management contracts, cable television contracts, etc.; 
13. 
Identifying, through review of title instruments, the owners to receive 
pre-lien letters; and 
14. 
Any activity that requires statutory or case law analysis to reach a 
legal conclusion. 
Pursuant to Rule 10-9.1(f) of the Rules Regulating The Florida Bar, public 
notice of the hearing was provided on The Florida Bar’s website, in The Florida 
Bar News, and in the Orlando Sentinel.  The Standing Committee held a public 
hearing on June 22, 2012.  
Testifying on behalf of the petitioner was Steve Mezer, an attorney who is 
the chairman of the Condominium and Planning Development Committee of the 
Real Property Probate and Trust Law Section of The Florida Bar, and attorney 
Scott Peterson.  In addition to the petitioner, the Standing Committee received 
testimony from Mitchell Drimmer, a CAM; Jeffrey M. Oshinsky, General Counsel 
 
 
8 
of Association Financial Services, a licensed collection agency; Andrew Fortin, 
Vice-President of Government Relations for Associa, a community management 
company; Kelley Moran, Vice-President of Rampart Properties and a CAM; 
Robert Freedman, an attorney; Erica White, prosecuting attorney for the 
Regulatory Council of Community Association Managers located within the 
Department of Business and Professional Regulation; Jane Cornett, an attorney; 
Tony Kalliche, Executive Vice-President and general counsel for the Continental 
Group, a community association management firm; David Felice, an attorney, a 
CAM, and owner of a community association management firm; Christopher 
Davies, an attorney; Brad van Rooyen, Executive Director of the Chief Executive 
Offices of Management Companies; Victoria Laney; Alan Garfinkel, an attorney; 
and Michael Gelfand, an attorney.  There were also several individuals present to 
observe the hearing. 
In addition to the testimony presented at the hearing, the Standing 
Committee received written testimony which has been filed with this Court.  
Included in the written testimony was a form petition that was submitted by 
hundreds of homeowner and condominium associations. As the petitions are 
substantially the same, only one has been filed with the Court as part of the written 
testimony.  By and large the testimony reflects the belief that the previous 
guidance provided by the Court in its 1996 opinion provides adequate guidance in 
 
 
9 
this area and another opinion is not necessary.  The testimony also reflected their 
concerns that too much regulation in this area will raise the cost of living in these 
communities and could potentially have a serious financial impact on community 
associations, property owners, and CAMS. 
Background 
CAMS are licensed through the Department of Business and Professional 
Regulation, Division of Professions, pursuant to Sections 468.431 – 468.438, 
Florida Statutes, and Florida Administrative Code chapters 61E14 and 61-20.  
(Written testimony of Dr. Anthony Spivey.)  State law defines community 
association management as including the following activities: “controlling or 
disbursing funds of a community association, preparing budgets or other financial 
documents for a community association, assisting in the noticing or conduct of 
community association meetings, and coordinating maintenance for the residential 
development and other day-to-day services involved with the operation of a 
community association.”  Section 468.431(2), Florida Statutes (2012).  There are 
over 18,500 individuals and over 1600 businesses licensed as CAMS in Florida.  
(Written testimony of J. Layne Smith.) 
1996 Opinion 
When the Court considered the activities of CAMS in 1996, it relied on 
 
 
10 
Sperry3 to determine what activity constitutes the practice of law: 
[I]n determining whether the giving of advice and counsel and the 
performance of services in legal matters for compensation constitute 
the practice of law it is safe to follow the rule that if the giving of [the] 
advice and performance of [the] services affect important rights of a 
person under the law, and if the reasonable protection of the rights and 
property of those advised and served requires that the persons giving 
such advice possess legal skill and a knowledge of the law greater 
than that possessed by the average citizen, then the giving of such 
advice and the performance of such services by one for another as a 
course of conduct constitute the practice of law. 
Applying the test, the Court held that: 
[T]he practice of law also includes the giving of legal advice and 
counsel to others as to their rights and obligations under the law and 
the preparation of legal instruments, including contracts, by which 
legal rights are either obtained, secured or given away, although such 
matters may not then or ever be the subject of proceedings in a court.4 
The Standing Committee and Court found that those activities that required 
the interpretation of statutes, administrative rules, community association 
governing documents or rules of civil procedure constituted the practice of law.5 
Drafting documents, even if form documents, which require a legal description of 
the property or which determine or establish legal rights are also the practice of 
                                          
 
3.  The Florida Bar v. Sperry, 140 So. 2d 587, 591 (Fla. 1962), vacated on 
other grounds, 373 U.S. 379 (1963). 
 
4.  Id. 
 
5.  1996 opinion, 681 So. 2d at 1123. 
 
 
11 
law.6  As the opinion noted, failure to complete or prepare these forms accurately 
could result in serious legal and financial harm to the property owner.7  Thus, the 
Court found the following activities when performed by a CAM would constitute 
the unlicensed practice of law: 
 
completing BPR Form 33-032 (frequently asked questions and 
answers sheet); 
 
drafting a claim of lien, satisfaction of claim of lien, and notice of 
commencement form; 
 
determining the timing, method and form of giving notice of 
meetings; 
 
determining the votes necessary for certain actions which would entail 
interpretation of certain statutes and rules; and 
 
answering a community association’s question about the application 
of law to a matter being considered or advising a community association that 
a course of action may not be authorized by law, rule, or the association’s 
governing documents. 
The Standing Committee and Court found that those activities that were 
                                          
 
6.  Id. at 1123. 
 
7.  Id. 
 
 
12 
ministerial in nature and did not require significant legal expertise and 
interpretation or legal sophistication or training did not constitute the practice of 
law.8  The Court found that the following activities when performed by a CAM 
would not constitute the unlicensed practice of law: 
 
completion of two Secretary of State forms (change of registered 
agent or office for corporations, and annual corporation report), 
 
drafting certificates of assessments, 
 
drafting first and second notices of date of election, 
 
drafting ballots, 
 
drafting written notices of annual or board meetings, 
 
drafting annual meeting or board meeting agendas, and 
 
drafting affidavits of mailing. 
The Standing Committee and Court found that other activities existed in a 
more grey area and whether or not they constituted the unlicensed practice of law 
would depend on the specific factual circumstances.9  The Court found the 
following activities to be dependent on the specific circumstances: 
 
modification of limited proxy forms promulgated by the state 
                                          
 
8.  Id. 
 
9.  Id. at 1122. 
 
 
13 
 
drafting a limited proxy form, and 
 
drafting documents required to exercise the community association’s 
right of approval or right of first refusal on the sale or lease of a parcel 
The Court found that modification of limited proxy forms promulgated by 
the State that involved ministerial matters could be performed by a CAM.10  The 
Court found the following modifications to be ministerial matters: 
 
modifying the form to include the name of the community association; 
 
phrasing a yes or no voting question concerning either waiving 
reserves or waiving the compiled, reviewed, or audited financial statement 
requirement; 
 
phrasing a yes or no voting question concerning carryover of excess 
membership expenses; and 
 
phrasing a yes or no voting question concerning the adoption of 
amendments to the Articles of Incorporation, Bylaws, or condominium 
documents.11  
For more complicated modifications, the Court found that an attorney must 
be consulted. 
                                          
 
10.  Id. at 1124. 
 
11.  Id. 
 
 
14 
Regarding the drafting of a limited proxy form, the Court found that those 
items which were ministerial in nature, such as filling in the name and address of 
the owner, do not constitute the practice of law.  But if drafting of an actual limited 
proxy form or questions in addition to those on the preprinted form is required, the 
CAM should consult with an attorney.12 
The Court also found that the drafting of documents required to exercise a 
community association’s right of approval or first refusal to a sale or lease may 
require the assistance of an attorney, since there could be legal consequences to the 
decision.13  Although CAMS may be able to draft the documents, they cannot 
advise the association as to the legal consequences of taking a certain course of 
action.14 
It is the opinion of the Standing Committee that no changes are needed to 
the 1996 opinion and those activities found to be the unlicensed practice of law 
continue to be the unlicensed practice of law and those activities that did not 
constitute the unlicensed practice of law are still not the unlicensed practice of law.  
However, the Standing Committee felt that in order to provide further guidance to 
CAMS and members of The Florida Bar, some of the 1996 activities which are part 
                                          
 
12.  Id. 
 
13.  Id. 
 
14.  Id. 
 
 
15 
of the current request needed clarification.  The Standing Committee also felt that 
activities that were not addressed in 1996 should be addressed using the 1996 
opinion as guidance.   
2012 Request 
Petitioner’s request sets forth 14 activities.  Each activity will be addressed. 
1.  Preparation of a Certificate of assessments due once the delinquent account 
is turned over to the association’s lawyer; 
2.  Preparation of a Certificate of assessments due once a foreclosure against 
the unit has commenced; 
3.  Preparation of Certificate of assessments due once a member disputes in 
writing to the association the amount alleged as owed; 
In the 1996 opinion the Court found that the preparation of certificates of 
assessments were ministerial in nature and did not require legal sophistication or 
training.  Therefore, it was not the unlicensed practice of law for a CAM to prepare 
certificates of assessments. 
None of the oral or written testimony provided a compelling reason why 
these certificates of assessment would warrant different treatment from those 
previously addressed by the Court in the 1996 opinion.  Thus, it is the opinion of 
the Standing Committee that a CAM’s preparation of these documents would not 
constitute the unlicensed practice of law. 
4.  Drafting of amendments (and certificates of amendment that are recorded 
in the official records) to declaration of covenants, bylaws, and articles of 
incorporation when such documents are to be voted upon by the members;  
In the 1996 opinion, the Court held that the drafting of documents which 
 
 
16 
determine substantial rights is the practice of law.  The governing documents set 
forth above determine substantial rights of both the community association and 
property owners.  Consequently, under the 1996 opinion, the preparation of these 
documents constitutes the unlicensed practice of law.   
Further, in Florida Bar v. Town, 174 So. 2d 395 (Fla. 1965), the Court held 
that a nonlawyer may not prepare bylaws, articles of incorporation, and other 
documents necessary to the establishment of a corporation, or amendments to such 
documents.  Amendments to a community association’s declaration of covenants, 
bylaws, and articles of incorporation can be analogized to the corporate documents 
discussed in Town.  Therefore, it is the opinion of the Standing Committee that the 
Court’s holding in the 1996 opinion should stand and nonlawyer preparation of the 
amendments to the documents would constitute the unlicensed practice of law. 
5.  Determination of number of days to be provided for statutory notice;  
In the 1996 opinion, the Court found that determining the timing, method, 
and form of giving notices of meetings requires the interpretation of statutes, 
administrative rules, governing documents, and rules of civil procedure and that 
such interpretation constitutes the practice of law.  Thus, if the determination of the 
number of days to be provided for statutory notice requires the interpretation of 
statutes, administrative rules, governing documents or rules of civil procedure, 
then, as found by the Court in 1996, it is the opinion of the Standing Committee 
 
 
17 
that it would constitute the unlicensed practice of law for a CAM to engage in this 
activity.  If this determination does not require such interpretation, then it would 
not be the unlicensed practice of law. 
6.  Modification of limited proxy forms promulgated by the State;  
In the 1996 opinion, the Court found that the modification of limited proxy 
forms that involved ministerial matters could be performed by a CAM, while more 
complicated modifications would have to be made by an attorney.15  The Court 
found the following to be ministerial matters:  
 
modifying the form to include the name of the community association; 
 
phrasing a yes or no voting question concerning either waiving 
reserves or waiving the compiled, reviewed, or audited financial statement 
requirement; 
 
phrasing a yes or no voting question concerning carryover of excess 
membership expenses; and 
 
phrasing a yes or no voting question concerning the adoption of 
amendments to the Articles of Incorporation, Bylaws, or condominium 
documents.16 
For more complicated modifications, the Court found that an attorney must 
                                          
 
15.  Id. 
 
16.  Id. 
 
 
18 
be consulted.  The 1996 opinion did not provide any examples of more 
complicated modifications which would require consultation with an attorney.  The 
Standing Committee believes this activity requires further clarification by example.   
Using the examples given by the Court, the types of questions that can be 
modified without constituting the unlicensed practice of law do not require any 
discretion in the phrasing.  For example, the sample form provided by the state has 
the following question:  “Do you want to provide for less than full funding of 
reserves than is required by § 718.112(2)(f), Florida Statutes, for the next 
fiscal/calendar year? ________ YES _______ NO.”  There is no discretion 
regarding the wording, it is a yes or no question.  The question could be reworded 
as follows:  “Section 718.112(2)(f), Florida Statutes, discusses funding of reserves.  
Do you want to provide for less than full funding of reserves than is required by 
the statute for the next fiscal/calendar year? ________ YES _______ NO.”  It is 
still a yes or no question.  As no discretion is involved, it does not constitute the 
unlicensed practice of law to modify the question. 
On the other hand, if the question requires discretion in the phrasing or 
involves the interpretation of statute or legal documents, the CAM may not modify 
the form.  After the above question regarding the reserves the form states “If yes, 
vote for one of the board proposed options below: (The option with the most votes 
will be the one implemented.) LIST OPTIONS HERE.”  Listing the options would 
 
 
19 
be a modification of the form.  If what to include in the list requires discretion or 
an interpretation of statute, an attorney would have to be consulted regarding the 
language and the CAM could not make a change.  For example, § 718.112(f) has 
language regarding when a developer may vote to waive the reserves.  The statute 
discusses the timing of the waiver and under what circumstances it may occur.  As 
a question regarding this waiver requires the interpretation of statute, a CAM could 
not modify the form by including this question without consulting with a member 
of The Florida Bar.  As found in the 1996 opinion, making such a modification 
would constitute the unlicensed practice of law.   
7.  Preparation of documents concerning the right of the association to 
approve new prospective owners;  
In the 1996 opinion, the Court found that drafting the documents required to 
exercise a community association’s right of approval or first refusal to a sale or 
lease may or may not constitute the unlicensed practice of law depending on the 
specific factual circumstances.  It may require the assistance of an attorney, since 
there could be legal consequences to the decision.  Although CAMs may be able to 
draft the documents, they cannot advise the association as to the legal 
consequences of taking a certain course of action.  Thus, the specific factual 
circumstances will determine whether it constitutes the unlicensed practice of law 
for a CAM to engage in this activity. 
This finding can also be applied to the preparation of documents concerning 
 
 
20 
the right of the association to approve new prospective owners.  While there was 
no testimony giving examples of such documents, the Court’s underlying principle 
that if the preparation requires the exercise of discretion or the interpretation of 
statutes or legal documents, a CAM may not prepare the documents.17  For 
example, the association documents may contain provisions regarding the right of 
first refusal.  Preparing a document regarding the approval of new owners may 
require an interpretation of this provision.  An attorney should be consulted to 
ensure that the language comports with the association documents.  On the other 
hand, the association documents may contain a provision regarding the size of pets 
an owner may have.  Drafting a document regarding this would be ministerial in 
nature as an interpretation of the documents is generally not required.  
8.  Determination of affirmative votes needed to pass a proposition or 
amendment to recorded documents; 
9.  Determination of owners’ votes needed to establish a quorum; 
In the 1996 opinion, the Court found that determining the votes necessary to 
take certain actions – where the determination would require the interpretation and 
application both of condominium acts and of the community association’s 
governing documents – would constitute the practice of law.  Thus, if these 
determinations require the interpretation and application of statutes and the 
community association’s governing documents, then it is the opinion of the 
                                          
 
17.  Id. at 1123. 
 
 
21 
Standing Committee that it would constitute the unlicensed practice of law for a 
CAM to make these determinations.  If these determinations do not require such 
interpretation and application, it is the opinion of the Standing Committee that they 
would not constitute the unlicensed practice of law. 
10.  Drafting of pre-arbitration demand letters required by 718.1255, Fla. 
Stat.;  
Under Section 718.1255, Fla. Stat., prior to filing an action in court, a party 
to a dispute must participate in nonbinding arbitration.  The nonbinding arbitration 
is before the Division of Florida Condominiums, Time Shares, and Mobile Homes 
(hereinafter “the Division”).  Prior to filing the petition for arbitration with the 
Division, the petitioner is required to serve a pre-arbitration demand letter on the 
respondent, providing: 
1. 
advance written notice of the specific nature of the dispute,  
2. 
a demand for relief, and a reasonable opportunity to comply or to 
provide the relief, and  
3. 
notice of the intention to file an arbitration petition or other legal 
action in the absence of a resolution of the dispute.   
Failure to include the allegations or proof of compliance with these 
prerequisites requires the dismissal of the petition without prejudice.  
In the 1996 opinion, the Court found that if the preparation of a document 
requires the interpretation of statutes, administrative rules, governing documents, 
 
 
22 
and rules of civil procedure, then the preparation of the documents constitutes the 
practice of law.  It is the opinion of the Standing Committee that the preparation of 
a pre-arbitration demand letter would not require the interpretation of the above-
referenced statute.  The statutory requirements appear to be ministerial in nature, 
and do not appear to require significant legal expertise and interpretation or legal 
sophistication or training.  Consequently, the preparation of this letter would not 
satisfy the second prong of the Sperry test, which requires that the person 
providing the service possess legal skill and a knowledge of the law greater than 
that possessed by the average citizen.  For these reasons, it is the opinion of the 
Standing Committee that the preparation of a pre-arbitration demand letter by a 
CAM would not constitute the unlicensed practice of law. 
Moreover, an argument can be made that the activity, even if the practice of 
law, is authorized.  As noted in the Petitioner’s March 28, 2012, letter, the Division 
has held that the statute does not require an attorney to draft the letter.  (Formal 
Advisory Opinion request.)  In Florida Bar v. Moses, 380 So. 2d 412 (Fla. 1980), 
the Court held that the legislature could oust the Supreme Court’s authority to 
protect the public and authorize a nonlawyer to practice law before administrative 
agencies.  As the Division of Florida Condominiums, Time Shares, and Mobile 
Homes has held that a nonlawyer may prepare the letter, the activity is authorized 
and not the unlicensed practice of law.   
 
 
23 
11.  Preparation of construction lien documents (e.g. notice of commencement, 
and lien waivers, etc.);  
In the 1996 opinion, the Court found that the drafting of a notice of 
commencement form constitutes the practice of law because it requires a legal 
description of the property and this notice affects legal rights.  Further, failure to 
complete or prepare this form accurately could result in serious legal and financial 
harm to the property owner.18 
While the 1996 opinion did not specifically address the preparation of lien 
waivers, the 1996 opinion found that preparing documents that affect legal rights 
constitutes the practice of law.  A lien waiver would certainly affect an 
association’s legal rights.  Further, as suggested by one of the witnesses, the area of 
construction lien law is a very complicated and technical area.  (Tr., p. 40, l. 10-
19.)  Therefore, it is the Standing Committee’s opinion that the preparation of 
construction lien documents by a CAM would constitute the unlicensed practice of 
law.19 
12.  Preparation, review, drafting and/or substantial involvement in the 
preparation/execution of contracts, including construction contracts, 
                                          
 
18.  Id. at 1123. 
 
19.  In re Advisory Opinion–Nonlawyer Preparation of Notice to Owner and 
Notice to Contractor, 544 So. 2d 1013 (Fla. 1989), the Court held that it was not 
the unlicensed practice of law for nonlawyers to complete notice to owner and 
preliminary notice to contractor forms under the mechanic’s lien laws so those 
forms are not included in the current opinion. 
 
 
24 
management contracts, cable television contracts, etc.; 
In the 1996 opinion, the Court found that the preparation of documents that 
established and affected the legal rights of the community association was the 
practice of law.  Further, in Sperry, the Court found the preparation of legal 
instruments, including contracts, by which legal rights are either obtained, secured 
or given away, was the practice of law.  Thus, it is the Standing Committee’s 
opinion that it constitutes the unlicensed practice of law for a CAM to prepare such 
contracts for the community association. 
13.  Identifying, through review of title instruments, the owners to receive pre-
lien letters; 
The testimony on this subject was mixed.  Some witnesses felt that this 
activity was ministerial and would not be the unlicensed practice of law (written 
testimony of Jeffrey M. Oshinsky, Mark R. Benson, and R. L. Reimer), while 
others thought that this would constitute the unlicensed practice if performed by a 
CAM (written testimony of Nicholas F. Lang, Shawn G. Brown, and Emily L. 
Lang).  However, none of the testimony defined what was meant by identifying the 
owners to receive pre-lien letters. 
It is the opinion of the Standing Committee that if the CAM is only 
searching the public records to identify who has owned the property over the years, 
then such review of the public records is ministerial in nature and not the 
unlicensed practice of law.  In other words, if the CAM is merely making a list of 
 
 
25 
all record owners, the conduct is not the unlicensed practice of law. 
On the other hand, if the CAM uses the list and then makes the legal 
determination of who needs to receive a pre-lien letter, this would constitute the 
unlicensed practice of law.  This determination goes beyond merely identifying 
owners.  It requires a legal analysis of who must receive pre-lien letters.  Making 
this determination would constitute the unlicensed practice of law. 
14.  Any activity that requires statutory or case law analysis to reach a legal 
conclusion. 
In the 1996 opinion, the Court found that it constituted the unlicensed 
practice of law for a CAM to respond to a community association’s questions 
concerning the application of law to specific matters being considered, or to advise 
community associations that a course of action may not be authorized by law or 
rule.  The court found that this amounted to nonlawyers giving legal advice and 
answering specific legal questions, which the court specifically prohibited in In re: 
Joint Petition of The Florida Bar and Raymond James & Assoc., 215 So. 2d 613 
(Fla. 1968) and Sperry.  
Further, in Florida Bar v. Warren, 655 So. 2d 1131 (Fla. 1995), the Court 
held that it constitutes the unlicensed practice of law for a nonlawyer to advise 
persons of their rights, duties, and responsibilities under Florida or federal law and 
to construe and interpret the legal effect of Florida law and statutes for third 
parties.  In Florida Bar v. Mills, 410 So. 2d 498 (Fla. 1982), the Court found that it 
 
 
26 
constitutes the unlicensed practice of law for a nonlawyer to interpret case law and 
statutes for others.   
Thus, it is the Standing Committee’s opinion that it would constitute the 
unlicensed practice of law for a CAM to engage in activity requiring statutory or 
case law analysis to reach a legal conclusion. 
CONCLUSION 
The findings of the Court in Florida Bar re: Advisory Opinion–Activities of 
Community Association Managers, 681 So. 2d 1119 (Fla. 1996) should not be 
disturbed and answer many of the questions posed by the Petitioner.  Areas which 
required clarification have been clarified by way of example using the 1996 
opinion as guidance.  Similarly, activities that were not addressed in 1996 are 
addressed using the 1996 opinion and other case law as guidance.  This proposed 
advisory opinion is the Standing Committee on Unlicensed Practice of Law’s 
interpretation of the law. 
Respectfully Submitted, 
/s/ Nancy Blount by Jeffrey T. Picker 
Nancy Munjiovi Blount, Chair 
Standing Committee on  
Unlicensed Practice of Law 
The Florida Bar 
651 E. Jefferson Street 
Tallahassee, FL 32399-2300 
(850) 561-5840 
Fla. Bar No. 332658 
Primary Email: upl@flabar.org 
 
 
27 
 
/s/ Jeffrey T. Picker 
Jeffrey T. Picker 
Fla. Bar No. 12793 
 
/s/ Lori S. Holcomb 
Lori S. Holcomb 
Fla. Bar No. 501018 
The Florida Bar 
651 East Jefferson Street 
Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2300 
(850) 561-5840 
Primary Email: jpicker@flabar.org 
Secondary Email: upl@flabar.org