Sarasota Tennis Club Holdings, LLC v. Country Club of Sarasota Homeowners Ass'n, Inc.
A tennis club sued its HOA and a board member for tortious interference, FDUTPA violations, and breach of a 1992 maintenance agreement after two prospective buyers backed out amid HOA pressure over its right of first refusal, and after a board member urged a neighboring landowner to oppose the club's rezoning on drainage grounds. The Second District reversed summary judgment on tortious interference and breach of contract, holding the defendants failed to carry their initial burden under the amended rule 1.510 standard, but affirmed as to the FDUTPA and declaratory judgment counts.
Key facts
- Sarasota Tennis Club Holdings sued its homeowners association and a board member for tortious interference, FDUTPA violations, and breach of a 1992 maintenance agreement after two prospective buyers of the tennis club property withdrew their offers.
- The HOA asserted a right of first refusal over the club's property and applied pressure regarding the sale; a board member also sent communications to a neighboring landowner urging opposition to the club's rezoning petition on drainage grounds.
- +2 more key facts with a free trial
Why it matters
Useful for plaintiffs resisting summary judgment on tortious interference: the court squarely rejects the notion that a third party's citation of multiple reasons for walking away defeats causation, applying a… — 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.