Lawonda Breedlove, et al. v. David M. Gersten, etc.

Summary

The Florida Third District Court of Appeal affirmed an order denying seven rental tenants’ motion to intervene in a receiver’s partition action involving a condominium complex destroyed by fire. The court held that the tenants were bound by a stipulated stay order limiting recovery against the condominium association to available insurance proceeds and barring recovery from association assets. It also held that the tenants lacked a direct and immediate interest in the property or partition action because any potential recovery was contingent on future judgments and distributions.

Holdings

1. The stipulated stay order barred the tenants from intervening to object to the sale of the condominium property or from asserting claims beyond the insurance-related relief permitted by that order.
2. The tenants lacked the direct and immediate interest required to intervene in the receiver's partition action.
3. The order denying intervention was affirmable even if the tenants' interpretation of the stay order were correct because the record independently established that they lacked a sufficient interest to intervene.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the tenants' motion to intervene was barred or limited by the prior stipulated stay order.
2. Whether the tenants possessed a sufficient direct and immediate interest in the partition action or property to support intervention under Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.230.
3. Whether the trial court abused its discretion by denying intervention.

Disposition

affirmed