Mercal Argumentative Essay

The issue here is a clash of interest between the Newport Arms (“Newport”), a condominium association, and Samuel Mercal, a resident of the condominium. Mercal is now asserting that his property right to allow people to stay in his unit for $50 per night should not be restricted by the rule in the declaration. The two main arguments by Mercal are: (1) the Board’s rule restricting leases is facially unreasonable and thus unenforceable and (2) even if so, there is no violation on his part because it is not a lease but a license. When determining whether the lease restriction is enforceable, the reasonable test applies. The homeowners’ association and condominium association recognizes that the standard for restrictions is reasonableness, which is determined by weighing the benefit of restriction against the negatives of enforcing the restriction. O’Buck, (Alaska, 1988). In this case, the utility of the restriction is to limit the turnover within the community, and the negative consequence is that the residents of the condominium can no longer lease out their units for less than 6 months for money or for any other purposes. A precedent in Florida, Woodside (Fla. 2002), supports the restriction on lease. The Woodside …show more content…
1335.04 and 1335.05, which state that the leases must be in writing. The communication between Mercal and his potential visitors through the website should constitute as an agreement in writing because all the terms – price, duration of the stay, the location of his unit, and the photos uploaded on the website – are clearly stated in writing and agreed upon between the parties before they move in. Mercal may argue that the agreement does not meet the formal requirements of a written lease: acknowledgment, writing, and notarization. For leases under 3 years, conveying formalities are not required as long as it is in