Pilac Management, Ltd. v. Parque Towers Developers, LLC
Pre-construction condominium purchasers, having lost an earlier appeal holding the developer had no obligation to complete by a date certain, filed new suits seeking the portion of their deposits exceeding 15% of the purchase price under Section 13 of their purchase agreements, after the developer resold the units for more than the contract prices. The trial court dismissed with prejudice on res judicata grounds while acknowledging the result was 'unfair and inequitable.' The Third DCA reversed, holding that res judicata cannot be mechanically applied where doing so would work an injustice and frustrate the parties' express contractual bargain.
Key facts
- Pre-construction condominium purchasers sued developer Parque Towers Developers, LLC seeking refunds of deposit portions exceeding 15% of purchase prices under Section 13 of their purchase agreements after developer resold the units for higher prices.
- Purchasers had previously lost an appeal against the developer on a different theory regarding the developer's obligation to complete construction by a date certain.
- +2 more key facts with a free trial
Why it matters
This is a usable reversal for any practitioner facing a res judicata dismissal: it revives and applies the 'ends of justice' exception from Universal Construction and deCancino in a concrete commercial context, showing… — full analysis with a trial
Read the full opinion, holdings & search — free for 30 days
The full opinion PDF, the rules the court applied, our significance analysis, the background facts, and full-text search across every tracked Florida decision — in your hands.
- Search every tracked Florida decision in seconds
- Save, tag & file the cases that matter into your own library
- Read the full plain-English analysis and holdings
Not ready to sign up? Get the free Friday digest — the week's key Florida decisions by email, no login required.
Florida Court Tracker provides summaries of publicly available court opinions for informational and research purposes only. This is not legal advice and does not create an attorney–client relationship. Always verify holdings against the official opinion.