Florida Appeals Court Upholds Holdout Owners’ Rights at Biscayne 21, Setting Major Precedent for Condo Terminations

In a major win for Florida condo owners, the state’s Third District Court of Appeal ruled in favor of a group of unit owners at Biscayne 21, a 13-story, 192-unit condominium complex in Miami’s Edgewater neighborhood. The court upheld a previous decision that invalidated a developer-led amendment to the condo’s governing documents, which had attempted to lower the required vote to terminate the condominium from 100% to just 80%. On July 10, 2025, the court denied a motion for rehearing, affirming that the original declaration of condominium required unanimous approval to terminate the association and could not be modified unilaterally.

The case, brought by eight unit owners represented by attorney Glen Waldman, challenged the termination plan led by Two Roads Development and its affiliate, Empira Group. The developer had acquired 86% of the units in a $150 million bulk buyout and sought to redevelop the property into a luxury condo project—Edition Residences Edgewater. After several owners refused to sell, the developer-controlled board amended the termination clause, a move the court ruled violated the contractual rights of the remaining owners.

The appellate court’s decision not only preserves the rights of the Biscayne 21 holdouts but also establishes a significant precedent with potential statewide implications. According to legal experts, the ruling confirms that developers cannot retroactively change essential voting rights in a declaration—particularly when it involves something as consequential as terminating a condominium association. The decision is expected to complicate bulk buyout efforts across Florida, especially in cases where the original governing documents require unanimous consent for termination.

For developers, this decision adds a new layer of legal risk when pursuing aging condo properties for redevelopment. Florida has seen a wave of such efforts in recent years, especially following the collapse of Champlain Towers South in Surfside, which raised concerns about aging buildings and spurred legislative changes. However, this ruling signals that even amid redevelopment pressures, courts are willing to protect owners’ contractual rights and block attempts to dilute those protections.

Two Roads Development has stated its intention to appeal the decision to the Florida Supreme Court. However, until or unless the state’s highest court overturns the appellate ruling, the current decision stands as binding precedent. The outcome strengthens the position of holdout owners and may force developers to offer more favorable terms—or abandon termination plans altogether.

Ultimately, this case underscores the importance of understanding and respecting the original terms set forth in a condominium’s declaration. Boards and developers alike must tread carefully when altering foundational governance provisions. As Miami’s real estate market continues to evolve, the Biscayne 21 ruling will likely influence how future terminations are approached—not just in Edgewater, but throughout the state.