Self-Help or Injunction: Are Both Remedies Truly Available Even When Expressed?
Homeowners’ associations (HOAs) and condominium associations regularly face the challenge of enforcing governing documents when homeowners fail to comply with maintenance obligations, such as neglecting to mow lawns or maintain landscaping. Associations must decide whether to utilize “self-help”—performing the maintenance (e.g., mowing an overgrown lawn or trimming unruly landscaping) and assessing costs to the owner—or seek a court-ordered injunction to compel compliance. Self-help offers an efficient, cost-effective alternative to litigation, often avoiding substantial attorney fees. However, a series of recent Florida appellate decisions has raised uncertainty about whether associations must exhaust self-help, when authorized by their governing documents, before pursuing injunctive relief. This article examines the controlling case law, the impact of judicial circuits on enforcement strategies, and considerations for associations navigating these remedies.
At Murrell Law, we maintain that associations are not obligated to exhaust self-help before seeking an injunction. Florida’s HOA statute, F.S. § 720.305(1), explicitly authorizes “actions at law or in equity, or both” to enforce covenants. The phrase “or both” grants associations the flexibility to choose the remedy best suited to the violation’s circumstances. Effective enforcement demands a tailored approach, as self-help may be inappropriate for complex violations or uncooperative homeowners. Governing documents must expressly permit self-help, and associations must consider risks such as trespass claims or disputes over assessed costs when entering private property.
Controlling Case Law
Recent appellate rulings have created a split on whether self-help, when available, precludes injunctive relief:
Mauriello v. Property Owners Ass’n at Lake Parker Estates, Inc., 337 So. 3d 484 (Fla. 2d DCA 2022), and Alorda v. Sutton Place Homeowners Ass’n, 82 So. 3d 1077 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012), held that an HOA’s self-help provision constitutes an adequate remedy at law, potentially barring injunctive relief unless self-help is attempted and proves ineffective.
McConico v. Morgan’s Mill Property Owners Ass’n, Inc., 387 So. 3d 368 (Fla. 6th DCA 2023), similarly required an HOA to attempt self-help before seeking an injunction, suggesting that failure to do so could lead to dismissal.
Mooney v. Color Le Palais of Boynton Beach Homeowners Ass’n, Inc., 4D2024-0967, 4D2024-2082 (Fla. 4th DCA Aug. 27, 2025), rejected this approach. In Mooney, an HOA sought an injunction to compel homeowners to replace a mulched yard with sod. The homeowners argued that self-help (re-sodding and assessing costs) was a prerequisite. The Fourth District held that self-help is not mandatory; associations may pursue injunctive relief independently, consistent with F.S. § 720.305(1) and longstanding precedent (Stephl v. Moore, 114 So. 455, Fla. 1927). The court cautioned that self-help risks “breach of the peace” and litigation, favoring injunctions as a safer remedy.
We believe Mauriello, Alorda, and McConico misinterpret the statutory flexibility of F.S. § 720.305(1), while Mooney correctly aligns with its plain language. The conflict has been certified to the Florida Supreme Court, which is likely to review the issue within 12 months. We anticipate the Court will affirm Mooney, clarifying that associations may choose their remedy without exhausting self-help, thus streamlining enforcement and reducing legal risks.
Circuit-by-Circuit Precedent
The following judicial circuits have controlling precedent on this issue, impacting enforcement strategies in their respective counties:
Other judicial circuits (e.g., First, Second, Third, Fifth, Eighth, Ninth, Eleventh) lack specific precedent on this issue. Associations in these circuits should consult legal counsel to develop compliant strategies, as older case law suggests flexibility to pursue injunctions without self-help, but document-specific analysis is critical.
Condominium Associations
Condominium associations, governed by F.S. § 718, are not directly bound by these HOA cases, as F.S. § 720 applies solely to HOAs. F.S. § 718.303 similarly authorizes “actions at law or in equity,” providing comparable flexibility. While HOA rulings may influence condominium law, as seen in cases like Hollywood Towers Condominium Ass’n v. Hampton, 40 So. 3d 784 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010), they do not establish binding precedent for condominiums. Even if the Florida Supreme Court resolves the Mooney conflict, its ruling will apply to § 720, not § 718, though judicial reasoning may guide condominium cases. Condominium associations should rely on their governing documents and consult counsel to determine appropriate enforcement strategies.
Enforcement Recommendations
To ensure compliant and effective covenant enforcement:
Review Governing Documents: Confirm that self-help is expressly authorized. Without such authority, options are limited to fines or litigation.
Document Diligently: For self-help, provide requisite notice (typically 14-30 days), engage licensed contractors, and maintain records (e.g., violation notices, photos, invoices) to mitigate disputes or liability risks.
Tailor Enforcement: Self-help is suitable for straightforward violations, such as mowing an overgrown lawn, but complex issues may warrant mediation (required for certain disputes under F.S. § 720.311 or § 718.112(2)(m)) or injunctive relief to avoid confrontation.
Understand Your Circuit: In Mauriello or McConico circuits, consult counsel before pursuing injunctive relief without attempting self-help. In Mooney circuits, leverage the flexibility to select the most effective remedy based on the violation’s nature.
Future Outlook
The Mooney conflict has been certified to the Florida Supreme Court, which is likely to review the issue within the next 12 months. We anticipate the Court will affirm Mooney, as its interpretation aligns with the plain language of F.S. § 720.305(1) and avoids mandating self-help, which could lead to disputes or liability. An affirmation would provide statewide clarity, allowing associations to choose their remedy without procedural barriers. A reversal favoring Mauriello or McConico would require associations to attempt self-help first, potentially complicating enforcement. Murrell Law will monitor developments and provide updates to ensure clients remain compliant.
Associations must develop fact-specific enforcement strategies, guided by their governing documents and local precedent.
Murrell Law - Serving Florida Boards with Precision | 35 Durbin Station Court, Unit 106, Saint Johns, FL 32259 | (904) 624-1474
