Once again, our board president — who already increased the 2026 legal budget by 66% — has involved our association in yet another lawsuit. This is not a small matter. Litigation affects sale prices, mortgage approvals, and buyer confidence because lenders and purchasers will ask about pending lawsuits and the association’s ability to fund them. Litigation shows up in Estoppel letters.
Our association has now joined four other condos in suing Swire over the seawall project. Notably, not all 11 Brickell Key condominiums are participating, meaning not everyone is sharing the costs. Why are the other associations not involved? What do they know?
More Lawsuits, More Legal Fees, NO Transparency
And once again, owners were never asked.
This lawsuit was filed on May 22, 2026. Owners should not be learning about it from me.
At minimum, this should have been openly discussed at a board meeting before committing owners to potentially significant legal expenses. Do not let anyone hide behind “attorney-client privilege.” Specific legal strategy may be confidential, but the overall issue, financial exposure, and decision to sue absolutely could have been discussed with owners before the board acted.
A more responsible approach would have been for Ms. Biletska to ask owners to fund this fight outside of the association. My guess is that very few owners would have voluntarily opened their wallets for it.
The Board Keeps Spending — Owners Keep Paying
This is now the THIRD law firm involved in this seawall dispute:
• Boies Schiller Flexner — we paid $20,000 of our dues to argue we did not need a new seawall.
• Levine Kellogg Lehman Schneider + Grossman — we paid $9,388 to argue we should not have to pay for the seawall.
• Now: Siegfried Rivera.
Why three law firms? Why no owner discussion? Why no transparency?
Residents deserve answers before more of our money disappears into legal fees
A copy of the lawsuit should have been provided to you. Unless someone is trying to hide something. It can be downloaded from the Clerk of Courts website.
You can read an article about the 107-page lawsuit here:
https://therealdeal.com/miami/2026/05/26/swire-sued-over-32-million-brickell-key-condo-assessment/
Note: This article is somewhat sympathetic to the plaintiff’s narrative, note the comments “Swire is violating state law…”, “This threshold was met over a decade ago…”, “the $32.3 million assessment was improperly imposed…”.
The inclusion of emotionally charged phrases from the complaint — such as “calculated scheme” and “illegally saddle them” — reinforces the plaintiffs’ framing. Those are serious accusations.
The point is this is based on the plaintiff’s and a lawyer’s interpretation of the documentation. A judge, or mediator may see things differently.