Case Name: The COLONIES CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC., a Florida corporation not for profit, Petitioner, v. CLAIRVIEW HOLDINGS, INC., a Florida corporation, Clairview Holdings, a Florida general partnership, and Jack L. Butcher, Respondents
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1982-09-15
Citations: 419 So. 2d 725
Docket Number: No. 82-81
Parties: The COLONIES CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC., a Florida corporation not for profit, Petitioner, v. CLAIRVIEW HOLDINGS, INC., a Florida corporation, Clairview Holdings, a Florida general partnership, and Jack L. Butcher, Respondents.
Judges: DAUKSCH, J., concurs.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 419
Pages: 725–727

Head Matter:
The COLONIES CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC., a Florida corporation not for profit, Petitioner, v. CLAIRVIEW HOLDINGS, INC., a Florida corporation, Clairview Holdings, a Florida general partnership, and Jack L. Butcher, Respondents.
No. 82-81.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
Sept. 15, 1982.
Michael J. Jahn, of Peirsol, Boroughs, Grimm & Bennett, Professional Ass’n, Orlando, for petitioner.
Thomas F. Lang of Swann & Haddock, P.A., Orlando, for respondents.

Opinion:
FRANK D. UPCHURCH, Judge.
Petitioner, the Condominium Association, seeks a writ of certiorari to quash a protective order. The order provided "that without further order of this court, [respondents] do not have to produce . any records or documents relating to that period of time subsequent to the 'turn-over' of the Condominium Association.... "
Petitioner filed suit against respondents (the developer and former director of the Association) for fraudulent misrepresentations and various breaches of fiduciary duties. The complaint was in seven counts, two of which specifically demanded an accounting. The documents sought are financial records related directly to the accounting counts.
Generally, a party must show that he is entitled, at least preliminarily, to the accounting before he is entitled to discovery of financial records. Charles Sales Corp. v. Bovenger, 88 So.2d 551 (Fla.1956); Bartolucci v. Bartolucci, 399 So.2d 448 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981); Giammaresi v. Parker, 326 So.2d 243 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976).
Here, the records denied by the court can have relevance only to the accounting and not to petitioner's right to an accounting. In these circumstances, the court's refusal to order discovery was not a departure from the essential requirements of law and we therefore DENY the petition for writ of certiorari.
DAUKSCH, J., concurs.
SHARP, J., dissents with opinion.