Real Estate, Rental & Leasing

MM&H, on behalf of its client, sought to hold the well-established Miami Beach developers of the historic Bentley Hotel located on Ocean Drive, as well as the building’s condominium association, accountable for levying millions of dollars in illegal assessments against unit owners and for self-dealing with association funds. In connection with discovery in this lawsuit, MM&H uncovered systematic fraud between those individual board members and their related entities in connection with heavily contested subpoenas. This fraud includes passing illegal budget schemes, commingling of association funds with funds of the individual’s related entities, failing to ensure the association kept adequate records, selective enforcement of the levy and collection of assessments, funneling funds to their related entities, and other acts of self-dealing or fraud which were all aimed at enriching the individual board members. Based upon this discovery, MM&H filed a separate derivative lawsuit in Miami Dade’s complex business division on behalf of the association against the individual board members and their web of related entities. This case is significant because it involves well-known developers, the restoration of a historic Art Deco building and the interpretation of novel legal issues that have not yet been consistently interpreted by the Florida courts. This case also seeks to hold developers accountable for actions taken against the best interests of the condominium association, including the minority unit owner. Following the filing of the derivative suit, Defendants engaged two additional law firms (bringing Defendants’ total representation to four, simultaneously engaged and actively litigating firms) to attempt to bury MM&H and its client in pre-trial motion practice. MM&H successfully briefed and litigated against that onslaught, overcoming multiple summary judgment motions in both actions, as well as numerous other motions in limine and Daubert Motions. MM&H further was able to successfully argue its own pre-trial motions, leading to the Court’s exclusions of or limitation of all of Defendants’ experts from trial. As a result of these pre-trial victories, Defendants requested pre-trial mediation and subsequently offered to settle the dispute, confidentially, on favorable terms to MM&H’s client.

Return to case filter page: