What Can We Learn From a Victoria’s Secret Model? Lessons From a High-Profile Real Estate Dispute

Introduction
Supermodel Karolina Kurkova and her husband, Archie Drury, are involved in a legal battle with a Miami Fisher Island private club, which prides itself as “Miami’s most exclusive private island beach club”. They have lived on the island with their three children since 2013 and own six residential units, mostly for investment purposes.

The Core of the Dispute
The conflict began when Drury left his job at Douglas Elliman to start his own brokerage on the island, leading to what they allege is targeted harassment by the club—interestingly, two of the club’s board directors are also directors at Douglas Elliman.

Incidents Leading to the Lawsuit

The club alleges that Drury’s membership was suspended due to two incidents:

1. Misunderstood Vehicle Use: Drury was accused of “stealing” a member’s Range Rover, which, in court documents, he claims was mistaken for his own.
2. Allegations of Misconduct: The board also also accused Drury of “screaming” at a marina employee and of making a crude gesture to another member. Drury claimed that all of these allegations were part of an “orchestrated effort” to “target, damage, punish, and ultimately expel” him and Kurkova from the club. 

Impact on Business and Social Life

• Club Utilization: Not being able to utilize the club has prohibited Kurkova and Drury from extending the perks to their tenants.
• Rental Desirability: Many of the Island benefits are within the member’s amenities, and because Kurkova and Drury cannot offer them, their properties are less than desirable.
• Social and Professional Interaction: Since becoming persona non grata in the club, Kurkova and Drury claim that they are not able to “interact socially and professionally” with prospective tenants and clients.

Selective Enforcement of Condo Restrictions and Enforcement of the Rules

As usual, this blog doesn’t take sides. We’ll let the court sort out the messy details. But, this does provide us with an opportunity to learn about selective enforcement when it comes to condo restrictions and enforcements of rules.

• Equal Enforcement Required: Generally, a condo association or HOA must enforce rules equally among all homeowners without singling out individuals or small groups.
• Consequences of Selective Enforcement: If selective enforcement is proven, the association is prevented (or estopped) from applying the discriminatory rule or regulation.
• Burden of Proof on the Owner: The condo owner has the burden of proof to demonstrate selective enforcement.
• Requirement for Comparable Evidence: The owner must provide an “apples to apples” comparison. In other words, if one wants to claim that a restriction on pickup trucks is being selectively enforced, one must show that others are being allowed to park pickup trucks.
• Invalid Comparisons: One cannot base an argument on the selective enforcement of a motorcycle or work vehicle restriction as that would be an “apples to oranges” comparison that will be rejected by the arbitrator or court.

Conclusion

So, there you have it. If we’re lucky, we may be getting a long list of members’ bad behaviors for us to compare to Kurkova and Drury’s actions. Was there selective enforcement? The courts may need to consider what other bad actions have been going on in the millionaire playground club in the most exclusive (and expensive) communities in the Miami area. Who’s excited for the discovery in this case LOL?