Court Denies Condo Association's Motion to Add Defendant in Design-Defect Lawsuit
Florida's Third District Court of Appeal affirmed a lower court's order denying the Toscano Condominium Association's request to file a fourth amended complaint adding DDA Engineers as defendants. The parties are presently locked in a separate lawsuit.
May 29, 2019 at 03:13 PM
4 minute read
Florida's Third District Court of Appeal has upheld an order by a Miami-Dade Circuit judge denying a Kendall condominium association's request to name an additional defendant in a lawsuit already brimming with parties.
On Wednesday the appellate court affirmed Miami-Dade Circuit Judge William Thomas' order rejecting a request by Toscano Condominium Association Inc. to add Miami-based engineering firm DDA Engineers P.A. to a multi-defendant lawsuit concerning design defects on the property. The opinion found the lower court had not abused its discretion in denying the association's motion to file a modified complaint, and held “the proposed amendment would have been the fourth time the association amended its complaint to bring in new parties to the litigation.”
“Significantly, the latest request to amend came after the case was set for trial and the trial court had specifically set a deadline for bringing in new parties,” the opinion said. According to the appellate court, the association waited to bring claims against DDA Engineers “until more than two years after the filing of the complaint and more than six months after the trial court conducted its case management conference.”
“Litigants must bear some responsibility in diligently pursuing their cases to resolution in a timely manner,” the opinion said. Prior to the association's attempt to name DDA Engineers as a defendant, the company was brought into the dispute by Nichols Brosch Wurst Wolfe & Associates Inc., the Coral Gables architectural firm responsible for the design of the Toscano condos. The appellate court noted the business “faced only indemnity claims from the architect of the condominium building” before further action was sought against them by the association, which later dismissed their claims against all other defendants.
“The association is correct that these are qualitatively different from the direct claims it sought to bring against DDA Engineers in its role as structural engineers and threshold inspectors,” the order said. “However, litigation must end at some point, and trial courts must be afforded the discretion to manage their dockets.”
Read the appellate court's opinion:
DDA Engineers' legal counsel, Oramas & Associates attorney John Oramas, said although the order is not final until the time for motions for rehearing have passed, he and his client are “very pleased” with the appellate panel's findings. He said the outcome was particularly satisfying since the case was in the Complex Business Litigation Division and case management orders “are quite strict in order to move these complex cases more efficiently and without unnecessary delay.”
“Clearly the Third DCA agreed and supported Judge Thomas' ruling which in this case, favored our client,” Oramas said.
However, the appellate court's ruling does not mark the end of litigation between the association and DDA Engineers. A separate lawsuit filed in Miami-Dade Circuit Court in January 2018 charges the company with negligence and breach of contract in failing “to verify that the construction of Toscano complied with governmentally approved plans and specifications,” as well as the Florida Building Code. The complaint contends the condo's defects include, but are not limited to, deficiencies with its “mechanical, electrical, plumbing, fire sprinkler, life-safety components” and the property's post-tension cable assemblies. A motion filed by the design company in response to the suit requested the case's dismissal and argued the plaintiff failed to include key documents necessary to commence legal action.
Toscano Condominium Association's attorney, Siegfried, Rivera, Hyman, Lerner, De La Torre, Mars & Sobel shareholder Jason Trauth, told the Daily Business Review the appeal was filed in addition to the distinct lawsuit against DDA Engineers “to protect our client's cause of action.”
“The case is limited to its facts, and a separate action is pending along the same lines,” Trauth said. “The association will be forging ahead with the separate action.”
Related stories:
Latest Chapter in the Vizcayne Condos Saga Has a $3 Million Settlement Attached to It
Unsafe Balconies, Water Leaks, Other Flaws Claimed at Luxury Sunny Isles Beach Condo
Doral Community Charges Lennar With Condo Construction Defects
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
© 2025 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 AllPlaintiffs Attorneys Awarded $113K on $1 Judgment in Noise Ordinance Dispute
4 minute readUS Judge Cannon Blocks DOJ From Releasing Final Report in Trump Documents Probe
3 minute readRead the Document: DOJ Releases Ex-Special Counsel's Report Explaining Trump Prosecutions
3 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
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