Commercial vs. residential issue--Agrobin decision.

• Author: Parker, Whilden S.
• Position: Letters - Letter to the Editor

After the June publication of my article reviewing the Johnson v. Davis case, I received a letter from a very alert and more current reader (Henry T. Sorensen II of Palm Harbor). He pointed out that I had made no mention of an important decision of the Third DCA concerning the "commercial vs. residential" issue. My thanks to Mr. Sorensen.

I regret the omission of Agrobin, Inc. v. Botanica Development Associates, 861 So. 2d 445 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003). This per curiam opinion held that the seller had no duty to disclose because the buyer of the condominium apartment unit was a corporation, and, although purchased as a vacation home, "it is undisputed that Agrobin also rented out the condominium." The court ruled it a commercial transaction because "it was purchased by a corporation for a commercial venture." It seems that the Third DCA has fashioned a rule that the buyer's intended use determines whether a transaction is commercial or residential. Does this mean that a live person buying an office building with the intent of using it as his residence has the benefit of the Johnson disclosure requirement?

I believe that the decision was not consistent with precedent (which examines the property...