Aventura Condo Developer, Opponents Reach $21.6 Million Settlement
The settlement ends a five-year legal battle between the Prive at Island Estates developer and project opponents in the Williams Island Property Owners' Association Inc.
March 13, 2018 at 04:13 PM
4 minute read
The opponents of the new Prive at Island Estates in Aventura agreed to pay $21.6 million to the developers of the luxury condominium under a settlement ending a five-year legal battle.
The Williams Island Property Owners' Association Inc. and the project developers reached the settlement Feb. 27, following a jury verdict on Jan. 30 saying the association was on the hook for $26 million for its opposition to the project.
The 16-story, twin-tower Prive condo with 160 units was finished in January and is the only development on an 8-acre island that connects by bridge to South Island, an enclave of 22 single-family homes. Another bridge connects South Island to Williams Island, an affluent community of luxury residences including the Bellini tower and the Mediterranean Village.
The Williams Island association paid Prive $1 million as soon as the settlement was reached and $80,000 to developer Gary Cohen's trust, according to the settlement. The remaining $20.5 million is due March 30.
The settlement “gives us everything we wanted and everything we fought so hard for in the lawsuits,” said the developer's attorney, Glen Waldman of Waldman Barnett in Miami. Colleagues Eleanor Barnett and Jeffrey Lam also were on the legal team.
Kenny Nachwalter shareholders Jeffrey Foreman, Richard Critchlow, Deborah Sampieri Corbishley and Elizabeth Brooks Honkonen represented the association. They didn't return a request for comment by deadline.
The Williams Island association sued Cohen in 2013 claiming he had no right to develop a condominium on the island because zoning allowed only single-family homes and a vested rights agreement to develop wasn't valid.
Cohen since then partnered with BH3 to form Prive Developers LLC, which sued the association. The crux of its claim is that a 1982 agreement prohibited Williams Island from objecting to development of the Prive site and from encouraging others to object.
The agreement was between Cohen's father, Norman Cohen, and Williams Island Associates, from which the Williams Island association inherited the agreement, Waldman said.
The jury in its Jan. 30 verdict agreed the association breached the no-objection agreement.
Since then, the Kenny Nachwalter team argued the case never should have gone to a jury and a judge should have decided whether the 1982 agreement was violated, according to a Feb. 14 court filing.
The attorneys argued the agreement not to object wasn't binding on future landowners and, despite this agreement, Williams Island had the right to sue based on litigation privilege, according to court filings.
The Kenny Nachwalter attorneys asked for a decrease of the $26 million jury award either to $540,476 in general conditions costs or to $12.6 million, which would include general condition and financing damages, according to the Feb. 14 motion for remittitur.
The lawsuit between the Prive developer and the Williams Island association is one of several battles over the project that played out in court.
Separately, the developer still is arguing in court that four South Island residents tried to stop Prive by maliciously spreading information that the condo project wouldn't be built and Cohen didn't have the right to build it, according to court records.
Those allegations are part of a larger lawsuit the developer filed against some South Island property owners.
Miami-Dade Circuit Judge Jerald Bagley in 2016 dismissed the entire lawsuit. The Third District Court of Appeal on Jan. 24 for the most part agreed with the trial court but overturned the dismissal of the developer's count alleging some South Island residents spread malicious and false information.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllDivided State Court Reinstates Dispute Over Replacement Vehicles Fees
5 minute readSecond Circuit Ruling Expands VPPA Scope: What Organizations Need to Know
6 minute read'They Got All Bent Out of Shape:' Parkland Lawyers Clash With Each Other
Courts of Appeal Conflicted Over Rule 1.442(c)(3) When Claims for Damages Involve a Husband and Wife
Trending Stories
- 1A Meta DIG and Its Nvidia Implications
- 2Deception or Coercion? California Supreme Court Grants Review in Jailhouse Confession Case
- 3State Bar of Georgia Presents Access to Justice Pro Bono Awards
- 4Tips For Creating Holiday Plans That Everyone Can Be Grateful For
- 5Red Tape, Talent Wars & Pricey Office Space Greet Firms Entering Saudi Arabia
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250