Order Gives Some Emergency Powers — But Not All — to Condo Associations
Law partners Alessandra Stivelman and Carolina Sznajderman Sheir assess an emergency order issued by the state Department of Professional Regulation governing community associations during the COVID-19 pandemic.
April 13, 2020 at 02:56 PM
3 minute read
On March 27, the Florida Department of Business and Professional Regulation issued Emergency Order 2020-04 in response to the COVID-19 crisis.
It was the first time the department weighed in on the global pandemic, attempting to clarify ambiguities for the thousands of community associations throughout the state. It is estimated that more than 60 percent of Floridians either live in a community association such as a condominium, homeowner association or a co-op.
The order helped clarify some questions but also left many more unanswered.
For instance, the order affirms that the COVID-19 pandemic is indeed an emergency and indicates that the statutes that provide community associations with emergency powers are applicable to the COVID-19 epidemic.
This appears to be in direct response to the debate surrounding the language "response to damage caused by an event" as practitioners argued that "damage" needed to be physical damage to the property, i.e. a hurricane or windstorm as was likely its original intent.
Order 2020-04 suspends the language "response to damage caused by an event," allowing community associations to avail themselves of some but not all of the emergency powers.
Although this DBPR order confirms the availability of the statutory emergency powers during the COVID-19 crisis, it appears that the division did not feel it was necessary to apply or fully activate all subsections of the emergency powers statutes at this time.
This is a critical distinction because the DBRP order specifically omits the powers that permit an association to borrow money and levy special assessments if needed. Community associations are inevitably bound to feel the effects of the financial hardships that we are facing as a result of this pandemic.
So what does this means for an association?
The order provides the emergency powers described in subsection 718.1265(1)(a)-(j), which pertains to condominiums and co-ops, and 718.1265(1)(a)-(h) for homeowner associations but left out subsections (k-m) for condos and co-ops, and (i-k) for HOAs, thereby omitting multiple financial provisions from the order.
This will become an issue that will require further order and/or clarification, particularly as associations come under financial strain. There will likely come a time in the near future when associations are unable to meet their financial obligations as we begin to experience the trickle-down effect of the millions of people who are now out of work.
Another item the order provides for is the suspension of the timing requirements for the filing of financial reports. Other than the items stipulated in Subsections 1(a)-(j) for condos and co-ops and 1(a)-(h) for HOAs, all other functions of the association remain intact and are not altered by the emergency powers.
Alessandra Stivelman and Carolina Sznajderman Sheir are partners at Eisinger, Brown, Lewis, Frankel & Chaiet in Hollywood.
Read the order:
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 AllSouth Florida Real Estate Lawyers See More Deals Flow, But Concerns Linger
6 minute readVedder Price Shareholder Javier Lopez Appointed to Miami Planning, Zoning & Appeals Board
2 minute readReal Estate Trends to Watch in 2025: Restructuring, Growth, and Challenges in South Florida
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Uber Files RICO Suit Against Plaintiff-Side Firms Alleging Fraudulent Injury Claims
- 2The Law Firm Disrupted: Scrutinizing the Elephant More Than the Mouse
- 3Inherent Diminished Value Damages Unavailable to 3rd-Party Claimants, Court Says
- 4Pa. Defense Firm Sued by Client Over Ex-Eagles Player's $43.5M Med Mal Win
- 5Losses Mount at Morris Manning, but Departing Ex-Chair Stays Bullish About His Old Firm's Future
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