Court: Florida Second District Court of Appeal
Case No.: 2D2024-1849
Date: September 12, 2025
Lower Court: Circuit Court for Hillsborough County, Judge Laura E. Ward
Parties: Appellants/Landlords — Mid-America Apartments, Ltd.; Mid-America Apartments, L.P.; Mid-America Apartment Communities, Inc.; Post Apartment Homes, L.P.; and Post GP Holdings, Inc. | Appellee/Tenant — Joshua Tracz
Counsel for Appellants: Ezequiel Lugo and Eleanor H. Sills, Banker Lopez Gassler, P.A. (Tampa & Tallahassee)
Counsel for Appellee: Madeleine C. Vaughn and Stephen A. Barnes, Barnes Trial Group, Tampa
Panel: KHOUZAM, J. (majority); BLACK and MOE, JJ., concurring
Background
In 2020, Joshua Tracz entered into a residential lease with Mid-America Apartments. The agreement contained a broad arbitration clause, requiring that “all claims” between the parties — including personal injury claims — be resolved through binding arbitration, unless specifically excluded. No one opted out.
The lease defined a “Claim” to cover any contract, tort, or personal injury dispute “arising from or relating to” the lease, the apartment, the property, or the common areas. The only exclusions were small claims and eviction/possession actions.
In 2023, Tracz filed a premises liability suit alleging negligence after being injured while attempting to move his boat. His landlords had relocated it from his rented boat slip to an adjacent one for repairs. When Tracz tried to operate the slip’s lift system, it malfunctioned. He opened the motor housing to fix it and was injured.
Trial Court’s Ruling
Mid-America moved to compel arbitration, citing the lease. The trial court denied the motion, reasoning that “no nexus” existed between the lease and Tracz’s tort claims.
Second DCA’s Analysis
On appeal, the Second DCA reversed. Applying de novo review, the court found:
- Valid arbitration agreement exists.
The lease clearly contained an arbitration clause covering personal injury claims. - Arbitrable issue exists.
The lease’s definition of “Claim” expressly included future personal injury claims “arising from or relating to” the property and common areas. Tracz’s injury — occurring on the property, at the boat slip — fell squarely within this scope. - No waiver.
Neither party opted out, and arbitration was properly invoked.
The panel relied heavily on Mid-Am. Apartment Cmtys., Inc. v. Gonzalez, 406 So. 3d 362 (Fla. 2d DCA 2025), where an identical lease clause compelled arbitration of a tenant’s personal injury claim in a common area. As in Gonzalez, the plain language of the lease was unambiguous, leaving no need to apply the broader “contractual nexus” test.
Holding
The Second DCA reversed and remanded with instructions for the trial court to grant arbitration.
Why This Case Matters
- Arbitration clauses in leases can extend to personal injury claims. If written broadly, they bind tenants and landlords beyond contract disputes.
- Plain language rules. Courts will enforce arbitration where the contract is explicit, leaving little room for “nexus” arguments.
- Landlords gain strong protection. Broad arbitration clauses shift personal injury disputes from jury trials into private arbitration.
Related Reading on Boltz Legal (from your approved list)
- What to Expect During a Lawsuit
- Should I File a Lawsuit for My Injury?
- What Makes a Negligent Security Case?
- The 3 D’s of Insurance Woes: Delay, Deny, Defend — And How to Fight Them
- How Do You Know If You Have a Personal Injury Case?
Today’s Insight
“Arbitration is essentially a creature of contract, a matter of consent, not coercion.”