From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Normandy B. Condo. v. Normandy

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District
May 16, 1989
541 So. 2d 1263 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1989)

Opinion

No. 87-2655.

March 15, 1989. Rehearing, Clarification and Certification Denied May 16, 1989.

Appeal from the Circuit Court, Palm Beach County, Mary E. Lupo, J.

Dennis J. Powers of Commander, Scott, Henderson and Powers, P.A., Palm Beach, for appellants.

Daniel S. Rosenbaum and Keith F. Backer of Becker, Poliakoff Streitfeld, P.A., West Palm Beach, for appellee.

Peter S. Sachs of Sachs Sax, P.A., Boca Raton, for amicus curiae — Kings Point Community Ass'n, Inc.


An easement exists in favor of every owner of a condominium unit in Kings Point Community (Kings Point) "for passage over and across" the roads within the community.

Appellees, residents of Normandy C Condominium of Kings Point, placed "speed bumps" on Normandy Lane, a roadway located between their units and the units of Normandy B Condominium.

Appellants, residents of Normandy B Condominium and a resident of Normandy F Condominium, filed a complaint seeking an injunction for the removal of the "speed bumps." The trial court finding "the plaintiff failed to prove . . . irreparable injury . . . if the defendant is allowed to retain the speed bumps" denied the relief sought.

Much of the testimony below dealt with the effect on traffic safety and the extent of any inconvenience with or without the "speed bumps."

Monell v. Golfview Road Association, 359 So.2d 2 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978) stands for the proposition that when the encroachment on an easement is willful and intentional the doctrine of balancing conveniences is inappropriate and the party so encroaching may not use mere inconvenience as a defense to a demand for removal.

While we sympathize with the plight of the trial judge to remedy the traffic hazards found to exist, under the facts of this case, the permissible legal solution cannot be the derogation of the rights of other common owners, and accordingly, we reverse and remand for further proceedings consistent herewith.

GARRETT, J., and CARNEY, ROBERT B., Associate Judge, concur.

LETTS, J., concurs specially with opinion.


I reluctantly concur because I believe Monell, a decision out of this court, controls the outcome. However, under the facts of this case, I have sympathy for the result reached by the trial judge.


Summaries of

Normandy B. Condo. v. Normandy

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District
May 16, 1989
541 So. 2d 1263 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1989)
Case details for

Normandy B. Condo. v. Normandy

Case Details

Full title:NORMANDY B. CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC., AND SOL GORDON, APPELLANTS, v…

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District

Date published: May 16, 1989

Citations

541 So. 2d 1263 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1989)

Citing Cases

Wilson v. Palmer

This court is also aware of two Florida decisions that directed the removal of "speed bumps", but both are…

U.S. v. Marine Shale Processors

Louis W. Epstein Family Partnership v. K-mart Corp., 13 F.3d 762, 769-70 (1994) (Pennsylvania law,…