9.                    Baywinds Community Association, Inc.  is a Florida Corporation doing business in Palm Beach County, Florida and organized under Florida Statute §720  et. Seq.

           10.                   The 2006 Annual Budget prepared by the Baywinds Community Association, Inc. reflects an estimated  annual gross income for 2006 in excess of TWO MILLION ($2,000,000.00) DOLLARS.

11.                 The demographics of the Baywinds community are diverse including residents of all  religious, racial and ethnic backgrounds,  and political ideologies.  However, Baywinds is an Active Adult Community so that only people over the age of eighteen (18) are allowed to reside in Baywinds and no more than Twenty (20% ) percent of the homes are allowed to have no residents 55 or older.
                        Lennar Corporation, (hereinafter “LENNAR”) is a Florida Corporation, doing business in Palm Beach County, Florida  with its principal place of business being at  700 N.W. 107th Avenue, Miami, Florida 33172.

12.             LENNAR was the developer of the Baywinds community.

13.             During the development phase, the Association was managed by a Board appointed by LENNAR (hereinafter the “LENNAR BOARD”).

            14.            The  LENNAR BOARD consisted of Sharon Caputo, Jill Cierpik and Robert Drews.

15.             Sharon Caputo, (hereinafter “CAPUTO”)  is an individual, over the age of eighteen (18).

16.             Jill Cierpik (hereinafter “CIERPIK”) is an individual, over the age of eighteen (18).

17.            Robert Drews, (hereinafter “DREWS”) is an individual, over the age of eighteen (18).

            18.             LENNAR by and through the LENNAR BOARD maintained full and complete control over the management of the Association  until the “turnover” when it  turned over the development to the Association.

19.            MMI of the Palm Beaches, (hereinafter “MMI”) is a Florida Corporation, doing business in Palm Beach County, Florida  with its principal place of business being at 14275 SW 142^nd Avenue, Miami, Florida 33186.

20.             At all times relevant hereto, MMI functioned as the property management company  for Baywinds Community Association, Inc.     

21.             Bryan WELCH, (hereinafter “WELCH”) is an individual, over the age of eighteen (18) and at all times relevant hereto a resident of Palm Beach County, Florida.

22.             At all times relevant hereto, WELCH was an employee, agent, or representative of MMI.

23.             WELCH is licenced community association manager.

            24.            At all times relevant hereto WELCH was assigned by MMI to act in the capacity of the property manager for Baywinds Community Association, Inc.

25.           James Krivok, (hereinafter “KRIVOK”) is an individual over the age of eighteen (18).

26.           At all times relevant hereto KRIVOK acted in the capacity of legal counsel for the Baywinds Community Associations, Inc.

27.             The Board  of Directors (hereinafter “BAYWINDS MASTER BOARD”) is the governing body of the Baywinds Community Association.

           28.             As of the date of filing this action, the BAYWINDS MASTER BOARD was comprised of the following persons:

a.

                                   Alex Tsacnaris - President;
                                    Marvin Levine - Vice-President;
                                    Karen Israel - Treasurer;
                                    Rosario Lantiere - Secretary;
                                    John Mikus;
                                    Louis Babbit;
                                    James Meyer;
                                    Joseph Cabano;
                                    Berenice Liberta;
                                    Martin Hamilton; and
                                    Leonard Katz

29.             Louis Babbit, (hereinafter “BABBIT”) is an individual, over the age of eighteen (18) and at all times relevant hereto a resident of Palm Beach County, Florida.

30.             Joseph Cabano, (hereinafter “CABANO”)  is an individual, over the age of eighteen (18) and at all times relevant hereto a resident of Palm Beach County, Florida.

31.             Martin Hamilton, (hereinafter “HAMILTON”)  is an individual, over the age of eighteen (18) and at all times relevant hereto a resident of Palm Beach County, Florida.

32.             Karen Israel, (hereinafter “ISRAEL”) is an individual, over the age of eighteen (18) and at all times relevant hereto a resident of Palm Beach County, Florida.

            33.             Leonard Katz, (hereinafter “KATZ”) is an individual, over the age of eighteen (18) and at all times relevant  hereto a resident of Palm Beach County, Florida.

34.             Rosario Lantiere, (hereinafter “LANTIERE”) is an individual, over the age of eighteen (18) and at all times relevant  hereto a resident of Palm Beach County, Florida.

35.             Marvin Levine, (hereinafter  “LEVINE” ) is an individual, over the age of eighteen (18) and at all times relevant  hereto a resident of Palm Beach County, Florida.

36.             Berenice Liberta, (hereinafter“LIBERTA”) is an individual, over the age of eighteen (18) and at all times relevant hereto a resident of Palm Beach County, Florida.

37.             James Meyer, (hereinafter “MEYER”) is an individual, over the age of eighteen (18) and at all times relevant  hereto a resident of Palm Beach County, Florida.

38.             John Mikus, (hereinafter “MIKUS”) is an individual, over the age of eighteen (18) and at all times relevant  hereto a resident of Palm Beach County, Florida.

39.             Alex Tsacnaris, (hereinafter “TSACNARIS”) is an individual, over the age of eighteen (18) and at all times relevant  hereto a resident of Palm Beach County, Florida.

40.             During the first half of 2004, while serving on the  "Presidents' Council," TSACNARIS, CABANO, LEVINE,  MEYER AND  MIKUS conducted and attended secret meetings at Hillary's Restaurant in Royal Palm Beach.

41.             In 2004, the LENNAR BOARD  created a “Master Advisory Council” which consisted of the President and one representative from each of the transitioned neighborhoods.

42.             In January  2005, the LENNAR BOARD decided to limit membership on this “Master Advisory Council” to the neighborhood Presidents. Although meetings of the Master Advisory Council were open to the residents, the “Presidents' Council” that was comprised of the same individuals continued to meet in secret.

                        Sometime in 2003 or early 2004,  CABANO,   LEVINE,   MEYER,  MIKUS, and TSACNARIS began discussions with  an attorney, David Core, to convince the LENNAR BOARD to alter the proportionate voting interests of parcel owners prior to turnover. David Core at that time was functioning as an unpaid legal advisor hoping to become the Association's attorney after turnover.

43.             Beginning in January 2004 and continuing over an eighteen (18)  month period,  CABANO, LEVINE, MEYER, MIKUS, and TSACNARIS conspired in closed secret offsite meetings to convince the  LENNAR BOARD to amend the Association’s Declaration prior to turnover to:

a.  alter the proportionate voting interests of parcel owners,

b.  keep this a secret from members, and

c.   avoid having to obtain member approval. (See exhibit “1").

          44.            On  June 24, 2004,  CABANO, LEVINE, MEYER,  MIKUS, and TSACNARIS were informed, by attorney David Core that one of the benefits to having the Master Association Directors appointed by their respective Neighborhood Associations, rather than being elected directly by the members of Baywinds was that “it protects smaller neighborhood associations from the possibly disproportionate influence a number of larger (neighborhood) associations can have in the master association election process.”

45.         Based upon the information provided by Attorney David Core, CABANO, LEVINE,  MEYER, MIKUS, and TSACNARIS were well aware that the intent and nature of the Seventh and Eighth Amendments were to materially and adversely alter the proportionate voting interests of the parcel owners in order to prevent the “disproportionate influence” that the voting interests of larger neighborhoods could have “in the master association election process.”

46.         On February 28, 2005, at the request of the LENNAR BOARD, the City Commission Board unanimously approved the LENNAR BOARD’s request for 2-story buildings.   CABANO, LEVINE,  MEYER, MIKUS, and TSACNARIS supported said action.  This approval resulted in the final Baywinds unit count being set to a number that triggered the three-month clock for mandatory turnover according to Florida Statute 720.307.(See Exhibit “2").

47.             The MASTER BOARD asked the LENNAR BOARD to alter the proportionate voting interests of parcel owners by amending the documents. (See Exhibit “3").

48.             On or about April 13, 2005, the LENNAR BOARD sent notice of a Special Meeting of the Master Association regarding the Baywinds Club Proposal to all Baywinds homeowners.

49.             The Proposal submitted by the LENNAR BOARD contained two (2) unrelated items the first concerning an Amendment to the By-Laws regarding the selection of the Board  after turnover and the second creating a “Club Purchase Committee” to negotiate the purchase of the clubhouse before turnover. (Attached as ExhibitA.swfExhibit “4").

50.             The  Proposal included a provision to amend the By-Laws of the Association prior to the turnover meeting to change selection of members of the BAYWINDS MASTER BOARD  from a generally elected Board to a Board of members appointed “without the need for an election.”

51.             On April 17, 2005, approximately three hundred (300) Baywinds Community Association, Inc., residents,  including the Plaintiffs,  petitioned the LENNAR BOARD, to allow the Members of the Baywinds Community Association, Inc., to vote on the two (2) items set forth in the Proposal individually.

52.        The LENNAR BOARD refused to allow the Members to vote on the two (2) items in the Proposal individually.

           53.         In response to the April 17, 2005, petition of the three hundred (300) resident requesting the opportunity to vote on items independently of the other LANTIERE, KATZ and MIKUS engaged in an attack to thwart the efforts including  labeling the efforts as “outrageous” and alleging that AMERO was  creating “divisiveness once again” and that  Plaintiffs have “already infected our community with their poison.” (See Exhibit “3").

54.        On April 21, 2005 at an informational meeting held at the Royal Palm Beach High School, Attorney David Core, who was representing CABANO, LEVINE,  MEYER, MIKUS, TSACNARIS,  BABBIT,  HAMILTON,  ISRAEL, KATZ,  LANTIERE and  LIBERTA    referred to the Plaintiffs as “recreational dissidents.”

55.             On April 21, 2005, at an Informational Meeting, Ben Solomon, legal counsel for the LENNAR BOARD  suggested that, should the Members vote in favor of the Proposal on April 26, 2005,  the Members at turnover would be permitted to vote for either the Presidents of each of the twelve (12) neighborhood associations automatically being appointed to the Board or for the neighborhood Members to vote for their Neighborhood’s representative to the Board.

56.             On June 8, 2005, AMERO, HELFGOTTT, HOROWITZ, KOLKIN, and other residents sent a letter to CAPUTO, as President of the LENNAR  BOARD, informing her of the closed meetings that were being conducted by the Club Purchase Committee.

            57.            On June 14, 2005, the LENNAR BOARD adopted the Seventh Amendment thus altering the proportionate voting interests of parcel owners without obtaining the approval of the parcel owners as required by Florida Statute 720.306 (1) ( c ). (Attached as Exhibit “ 5").

58.            On June 15, 2005 the LENNAR BOARD  sent out a notice for the turnover and the annual meeting of Baywinds Community Association, Inc.

59.             On June 28, 2005, LENNAR executed a Quitclaim Deed to the Common Areas within the community transferring ownership to the Association.

60.             On or about June 28, 2005, the LENNAR BOARD executed the Seventh Amendment to the By-Laws of the Association. A copy of this Amendment is attached as

61.              On June 29, 2005 LENNAR, as the Developer, acting by and through the LENNAR BOARD  turned over the community to the homeowners and CAPUTO, CIERPIK and DREWS submitted their letters of resignation.      

62.             On June 29, 2005 at the Annual Meeting of the Association, turnover occurred when 1) the Developer Board members resigned and the neighborhood Presidents, as provided for in the Seventh Amendment, became Board members, 2)  TSACNARIS, who was not an owner at that time and therefore ineligible to even be a Board member, was elected as President of the Board, 3) LENNAR as Developer turned over all official records and documents to the Association  at 7:55 PM, and 4) LENNAR  presented a general release form to be signed at some future date.

63.             On July 25, 2005 three (3) letters were faxed and mailed to KRIVOK inquiring as to  a) the eligibility of TSACNARIS to serve on the Master Board, b) the legitimacy of the Seventh Amendment, and c) closed Association meetings. (Attached as Exhibit “6").

            64.            On July 25, 2005 three (3) letters were  mailed to WELCH  regarding a) the eligibility of  TSACNARIS to serve on the Master Board, b) the legitimacy of the Seventh Amendment, and c) closed Association meetings. (Attached as Exhibit “7").

65.           On July 25, 2005 three (3) letters were to  mailed the BAYWINDS MASTER BOARD  regarding a) the eligibility of  TSACNARIS to serve on the Master Board, b) the legitimacy of the Seventh Amendment, and c) closed Association meetings. (Attached as Exhibit “7").

66.             In response to the July 25, 2005 letter,  KRIVOK called AMERO to discuss the issue of  TSACNARIS’ eligibility to serve on the Master Board and the legitimacy of the Seventh Amendment. When AMERO asked multiple times whether KRIVOK represented “the Board” or the “Association,” KRIVOK repeatedly said that he represented “the Board” as directed by its President, TSACNARIS.

67.             On or about July 25, 2006 AMERO informed KRIVOK that the BAYWINDS MASTER BOARD members were claiming that the LENNAR BOARD  had “intended” that the members of the  MASTER BOARD would remain in office until the 2006 Annual Member Meeting even if they were no longer a neighborhood President. To which KRIVOK replied that what was “written” not what was “intended” is what is important.

68.             On July 26, 2005, a Board Meeting was held with KRIVOK and WELCH and also Cathy Carr of MMI present and participating.

69.             On July 27, 2005, one (1)  month after the “turnover”  and after the LENNAR BOARD members resigned, the LENNAR BOARD adopted the Eighth Amendment thus altering the proportionate voting interests of parcel owners without authority as per Florida Statute 617.0806 and 720.307 and without obtaining the approval of the parcel owners as required by Florida Statute 720.306 (1)( c ). (Attached as Exhibit “8).

70.             On or about July 25, 2005, without a legitimate legal basis, The LENNAR BOARD claimed that turnover did not occur on June 29, 2004 and that CAPUTO,  CIERPIK and  DREWS  remained in office.   Said action was at the request of  KRIVOK and with the agreement of the BAYWINDS MASTER BOARD.

71.             On July 27, 2005, the LENNAR BOARD members who had previously resigned as Board members at the June 29, 2005 turnover meeting, adopted the Eighth Amendment to the Declaration of the Association stating that “there are no members or members entitled to vote on the amendment.”   Attached as     

72.             Notwithstanding the assertions of the LENNAR BOARD that turnover had not actually occurred and that the LENNAR BOARD  was still in control, CABANO,  LEVINE,  MEYER,  MIKUS, AND  TSACNARIS AND  BABBIT,  HAMILTON,  ISRAEL,  KATZ,  LANTIERE and  LIBERTA , KRIVOK and  WELCH conducted a  Baywinds Community Association Master Board Meeting during which business was conducted including the passing of a motion to hire contractors. (See exhibit “9').

73.             On August 2, 2005, the LENNAR BOARD  members who previously had submitted a first set of Resignation letters on June 29, 2005,  at the turnover meeting, submitted a second set of Resignation letters.

74.             On August 3, 2005 KRIVOK sent a letter to AMERO claiming a) it to be a response to all of those letters but failing to answer many of the questions raised in the nine letters sent on July 25, 2005 and  stating that  b) the June 29, 2005 turnover did not “technically occur” and the “developer appointed directors remained in office” and c) that because a Quit Claim Deed making  TSACNARIS an owner had been recorded in the Public Records,  TSACNARIS was now eligible to serve on the Master Board. (See Exhibit “10").

            75.            On August 10, 2005, in a good faith effort to address their questions and concerns several Plaintiffs sent  KRIVOK a letter a) contesting the validity of both the Seventh and Eighth Amendments, b) stating  their intent to file a Petition for Mediation with the state, and c) notifying of failere to provide answers to many of the previously submitted questions in the nine (9)  letters sent on July 25, 2005.  (See Exhibit “11").

76.            On  or about August  20, 2005, the Plaintiffs and several other residents, exercised their right to file a Petition for Mediation through the Department of Business and Professional Regulations pursuant to Florida Statute §720.311. (A copyof the Petition is attached as Exhibit “16").

77.             The Petition for Mediation challenged the validity of the Seventh and Eighth Amendments and the validity of the Board.

78.             On August 17, 2005, the Plaintiffs, again acting in good faith attempted to  address their questions and concerns sent  KRIVOK a letter outlining the following issues:

a.      many of the questions submitted in the  nine (9) letters sent on July 25,2005 still had still not been answered;

b.     CABANO reported at Pelican Cove’s August 15, 2005 Board meeting that KRIVOK and  CAPUTO, CIERPIK and DREWS worked together to resolve the issue regarding the conflict between the Articles of Incorporation and the By-Laws on the issue of the Seventh Amendment;

                        c.      CABANO, LEVINE, MEYER, MIKUS, TSACNARIS, BABBIT,  HAMILTON,  ISRAEL,  KATZ,  LANTIERE LIBERTA,  KRIVOK and  WELCH conducted a Master Board meeting in direct contradiction of the position that the LENNAR BOARD was in control;

d.      requesting the legal basis be provided for the claim that turnover did not occur on June 29, 2005. (See exhibit “12").

79.             On or about August 24, 2005, the  Plaintiffs sent a  letter to KRIVOK notifying him that:

a.     The BAYWINDS MASTER BOARD, including, CABANO,  LEVINE, MEYER, MIKUS, TSACNARIS,  BABBIT, HAMILTON, ISRAEL,  KATZ,  LANTIERE and LIBERTA had a fiduciary responsibility to respond to reasonable questions submitted by the Plaintiffs,

b.    failing to respond could put them at risk of becoming personally liable for their actions and inactions, and

c.    the Petition for Mediation was available on the internet for review and discussion. (See Attached “13").

80.             On September 9, 2005, the BAYWINDS MASTER BOARD  sent a letter to those who had signed the Petition for Mediation  threatening to a suit for legal fees and anticipated damages of more than THREE MILLION FIVE HUNDRED ($3,500,000.00) DOLLARS  and citing Florida Statute 617.0806 as the legal basis for the failure of turnover to occur on June 29, 2005. The letter was written by KRIVOK was on MMI letterhead and was signed by WELCH.

             81.          On September 9, 2005 a letter was sent to all residents by the BAYWINDS MASTER BOARD. The letter was written  KRIVOK was printed on MMI letterhead and was signed by WELCH and stated that:

a.    Claimed the Petition for Mediation had no merit,

b.    misrepresented Florida Statute 617.0806,

c.    violated Plaintiffs’ civil rights as protected by Florida Statute 720.304 (4),

d.   falsely claimed the Plaintiffs were putting the purchase of the clubhouse at risk,

e.   falsely claimed that Plaintiff damages could potentially be in excess of THREE MILLION FIVE HUNDRED ($3,500,000.00) DOLLARS, and

f.     informed the residents that The BAYWINDS MASTER BOARD intended to sue Plaintiffs personally for damages in excess of  THREE MILLION FIVE HUNDRED ($3,500,000.00) DOLLARS . (See Exhibit “14").

82.            At all times relevant hereto the Baywinds Community Association, Inc. by and through BAYWINDS MASTER BOARD  had actual and/or de facto jurisdiction over the matters as set forth herein.

83.             The Baywinds Community Association, Inc. is a not for profit corporation and also a  privately governed community that has substantially replaced the role of a municipality in the lives of the residents.

84.             The  Baywinds Community Association, Inc.,  has many attributes of a municipality and ostensibly operates like a  municipality.

            85.             The Baywinds Community Association, Inc.  is governed by an elected Board, the BAYWINDS MASTER BOARD  which operates much like a Town Council. 

86.             The authority of the BAYWINDS MASTER BOARD is bestowed upon them by the State of Florida pursuant to Florida Statute Chapter 720.

87.            Baywinds Community Association, Inc, by and through the BAYWINDS MASTER BOARD regulates the daily life of the Baywinds residents similar to a municipality and the actions of the BAYWINDS MASTER BOARD  are analogous to governmental actions in that the BAYWINDS MASTER BOARD performs many functions typically left to municipal government.

88.           The BAYWINDS MASTER BOARD’s  regulation and by-laws are the de facto equivalent of municipal ordinances, including but no limited to:

a.   Use of recreational facility;

b.   Hiring decisions;

c.   Financial decisions directly impacting  upon the residents;

d.   Parking control;

e.   Maintaining all of the roads within Baywinds including the drainage system:

f.    Aesthetic and architectural control; and

g.   Regulation of contracts for services directly impacting upon the residents.

89.             The BAYWINDS MASTER BOARD establishes and enforces the community rules.

            90.            The BAYWINDS MASTER BOARD exercises certain judicial authority over the residents as the BAYWINDS MASTER BOARD has authority over the  violation of rules, including the right to levy fines for violations.

91.            The BAYWINDS MASTER BOARD exercises quasi -zoning power by controlling what resident are permitted to do with their property.

92.             The Baywinds Community Association, Inc provides the following services:

a.   security;

b.   cable television;

c.   grounds maintenance; and

d.   building maintenance.

93.             The BAYWINDS MASTER BOARD  has the authority to exercise certain police powers, including but not limited to  regulation as to parking and vehicles and architectural review. There are speed limit signs  and stop signs on these private roads which the BAYWINDS MASTER BOARD has the authority to enforce through fines.

94.             The functions of the BAYWINDS MASTER BOARD  are financed through the mandatary assessment levied by the BAYWINDS MASTER BOARD  upon the residents.

95.             The BAYWINDS MASTER BOARD establishes  and collects assessments against residents.

96.             The assessments are  similar to a tax and the failure to pay the assessments subjects the resident to foreclosure on their property.

97.             The recreational facilities within the Baywinds Community Association, Inc. over which the BAYWINDS MASTER BOARD  exercises control include:

                        a.  Gym; Aerobics Room; Locker Rooms with Saunas;

b.  Three Heated Pools and a Hot Tub;
                                    Library with 2 Computers and a Lending Library;
                                    Billiard Room with 4 Tables;                         Craft Room with Kiln;
                                    Media Room with state of the art sound system;
                                    2 Card/Meeting Rooms;
                                    Grand Ballroom with Stage and Lights; and
                                    Limited Kitchen Facilities.

98.             The Baywinds Community Association, Inc.  maintains a community clubhouse as a common element for the use and benefit of the residents. Said structure is the local public forum where resident meetings take place, community affairs are handled, and a host of other activities and services traditionally provide by a municipality are centered.

99.             The Plaintiffs as residents and  members of the Baywinds Community Association, Inc., did not waive their constitutional rights by purchasing real property within the Baywinds Community and signing contracts which contained nonnegotiable deed restrictions.

100.             The Defendants as set forth herein have  engaged and are engaging in actions and practices that deny the Plaintiffs the right of democratic participation in the governing affairs of their community as guaranteed by common law, statutory law and the Florida Constitution.

101.             Florida Statute §720.305 provides in pertinent part, that:

            Each member and the member's tenants, guests, and invitees, and each association, are governed by, and must comply with, this chapter, the governing documents of the community, and the rules of the association. Actions at law or in equity, or both, to redress alleged failure or refusal to comply with these provisions may be brought by the association or by any member against:

a.   The association;
                                           A member;
                                           Any director or officer of an association who willfully and knowingly fails to comply with said  and
                                           Any tenants, guests, or invitees occupying a parcel or using the common areas.

102.              The Plaintiffs as members of the Baywinds Community Association, Inc.  bring this action against the Baywinds Community Association, Inc,  and the directors and officers of the Baywinds Community Association, Inc. pursuant to Florida State §720.305.

103.             Pursuant to Florida State §720.305, the prevailing party in any such litigation is entitled to recover reasonable attorney's fees and costs.

104.             All conditions precedent to filing this action have been met, excused, or waived.

COUNT I

VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 1 §2 of THE FLORIDA CONSTITUTION

105.             The Plaintiffs sue the Baywinds Community Association, Inc., for Deprivation of their rights under Florida Constitution Article 1 §2.

106.             The Plaintiffs reallege each and every allegation as set forth in paragraphs 1 through 129  above and would further allege:

107.             Article I, Section 2 of the Florida Constitution provides that

            “All natural persons, female and male alike, are equal before the law and have inalienable rights, among which are the right to enjoy and defend life and liberty, to pursue happiness, to be rewarded for industry, and to acquire, possess and protect property.”

108.             Given that powers and authority of the Baywinds Community Association, Inc., and the BAYWINDS MASTER BOARD over the residents and that the roles are analogous to governmental actions the issues as set forth herein  call into play the constitutional limitations and considerations  that apply to a municipality.

109.             The Baywinds Community Association, Inc, by and through its governing body, the BAYWINDS MASTER BOARD violated the civil rights of the Plaintiffs through false claims, threats and intimidation in response to the Plaintiffs exercising their right to enjoy and defend life and liberty, to pursue happiness as protected by  Article  I, §2 of the State Constitution.

110.             During the August  29, 2005 Board Meeting, in response to the Filing of the Petition for Mediation, KRIVOK addressed the membership and encouraged  those in attendance to take action as to these who had signed the Petition stating, inter alia,

a.

“maybe some of you folks need to get their attention”

b.

Advising that the Board was sending each of the people who signed the petition a letter explaining why their actions may have an adverse impact on the community and what their legal liability will be if they choose to pursue that.

                       c.

                          “But don’t take a small group of people and put legal barriers that prevent the wishes of the overwhelming majority of homeowners from being effectuated by some frivolous action that they choose to take. “

d.

“And that’s where we can use your help.”

111.             After KRIVOK invited those in attendance to take action, TSACNARIS twice asked the individuals who had signed the Petition for Mediation to stand up at the meeting after which time the meeting degenerated into a free for all with obscene gestures being made towards the Petitioners and their supporters and one resident charging toward KAIMAN, a Petitioner, requiring  KAIMAN, to put a chair between himself and this person. Another person charged toward Harvey Caspari, a resident of Baywinds Community Association, Inc. and a supporter of the Plaintiffs, and people had to hold this aggressor back.

112.             The actions of KRIVOK, TSACNARIS and the BAYWINDS MASTER BOARD caused the Plaintiffs to hear for their immediate physical safety and well bin and also caused the Plaintiffs to continuing to fear for the safety of themselves and their families and associates.

113.             The Baywinds Community Association, Inc, by and through it governing body, the BAYWINDS MASTER BOARD:

a.

Engaged in actions as set forth in this Complaint with the intent and the result of depriving the Plaintiffs of   their right to enjoy and defend life and liberty, to pursue happiness;

b.

Conducted secret meetings as set forth in this complaint;

                        c.

                        Caused the Association documents to be amended to so alter the voting rights of the residents;

d.

Acted in the capacity of a Board and made decisions impacting the community while the validity of s sitting Board was in question, to wit, whether it was the LENNAR BOARD or the BAYWINDS MASTER BOARD that was actually in office;

e.