Post by Admin on May 5, 2014 15:49:29 GMT -5
When Frd finds another case to support a lawsuit he's working on (like mine), he sends me the documents that are relevant because he knows I'm interested. He just found additional research that recounted an appellate court decision in Florida (BTW "appellate" just means an appeal was made by the losing party to a superior "appellate" court. Frd says that appellate court judges are more likely to reach accurate decisions than lower courts).
In this case, homeowners sued their Association for enforcing an "over 55 restriction" which had been added to their Declaration after Florida's Fair Housing Act voided their previous age restriction. The homeowners said that their Declaration, like SLohA's, had no provision to amend the Declaration. The Amendment was subsequently adjudged NULL.
The court then adjudged that the Association was in violation of the Fair Housing Act and essentially ordered it to stop representing the community as "housing for older persons".
Westwood Community Five is located in Tamarac, Florida and now advertises itself as an all inclusive family orientated community.
Of course, the principle of this case is applicable to my case as well; there is no amendatory provision in SLohA's Declaration and any amendments attempted will be adjudged--like the one above--NULL and VOID. Thus, the Preservation Notice recorded in 2013 referenced a document which is invalid when it referred to the Amendments and re-named them "a replacement declaration".
The full text is here>>>
In this case, homeowners sued their Association for enforcing an "over 55 restriction" which had been added to their Declaration after Florida's Fair Housing Act voided their previous age restriction. The homeowners said that their Declaration, like SLohA's, had no provision to amend the Declaration. The Amendment was subsequently adjudged NULL.
Westwood’s declaration of restrictions did not reserve to the association the right to amend the covenants or provide for amendment of the covenants by a vote of lot owners.
The trial court agreed with appellees (homeowners) that the association was without the authority to enact an amendment exempting itself from the provisions of the Fair Housing Act, and enjoined the association from representing that the community qualifies as “housing for older persons” and that residents must be 55 years of age or older, and from further violating the Fair Housing Act.
Westwood Community Five is located in Tamarac, Florida and now advertises itself as an all inclusive family orientated community.
Of course, the principle of this case is applicable to my case as well; there is no amendatory provision in SLohA's Declaration and any amendments attempted will be adjudged--like the one above--NULL and VOID. Thus, the Preservation Notice recorded in 2013 referenced a document which is invalid when it referred to the Amendments and re-named them "a replacement declaration".
The full text is here>>>