Florida condominium boards often hear that the business judgment rule protects their decisions. New Horizons Condominium Master Association, Inc. v. Harding, decided by the Third District Court of Appeal on February 23, 2022, shows both the value of that principle and the importance of reading a decision in context. Although the dispute arose in South Florida, the opinion concerns Florida association law that can be relevant to Northwest Florida communities, subject to counsel's review of controlling precedent.
What the dispute involved
The master association supplied common services to several subassociations, including bulk cable service. A dispute developed over assessments and a budget allocation associated with cable costs. The trial court required disclosure of audits and entered summary judgment against the master association concerning the challenged allocation.
On appeal, the court affirmed the audit-disclosure ruling without further discussion but reversed other aspects of the judgment. The association had invoked business-judgment deference in opposing summary judgment. The appellate court rejected the argument that failure to plead the rule as an affirmative defense automatically prevented its consideration in those circumstances.
The opinion describes deference for an association decision that is within the association's authority and reasonable, rather than arbitrary, capricious, or made in bad faith. It also identified factual disputes concerning the timing of settlement, budget development, and the need to collect assessments. Those disputes could not properly be resolved through the challenged summary judgment.
What a board can learn
The decision does not grant a board power beyond its declaration or statutes. Authority remains a threshold question. A director should be able to identify the provision supporting an assessment, contract, or expenditure before relying on discretion about whether the decision is sensible.
The case also does not make records requests disappear. The affirmed audit-disclosure component is a useful reminder that defending a business decision and complying with document-access obligations are separate issues. A board should keep responding to lawful records requests even when the underlying financial decision is disputed.
For present disputes, counsel should check later decisions and current statutory language, including the 2026 changes to Chapter 617. A case discussion is historical legal education, not a prediction that a court will uphold a new board decision.
Practical board checklist
- Identify the statutory and document authority for the proposed action.
- Put financial assumptions, alternatives, and relevant professional advice in the board packet.
- Record why the selected option serves the association and address known conflicts.
- Preserve the timing and supporting materials for budgets, settlements, and assessments.
- Treat records-access duties separately from disagreement over the merits of a decision.
- Refer litigation strategy and the applicability of business-judgment protection to counsel.
The most useful habit is to build an informed decision record before voting. A later reference to the business judgment rule is no substitute for lawful authority, accurate information, and a fair process.
Reviewed November 4, 2026. Florida educational information only. Obtain association-specific legal advice before acting.