Is a Stone-Tile Roof a "Metal Roof"? First DCA Reverses HOA's Remove-and-Replace Injunction

Architectural disputes are among the most common fights in Florida homeowners associations, and roofs are a frequent flashpoint. On November 19, 2025, Florida’s First District Court of Appeal reversed a summary judgment that required an Okaloosa County owner to remove and replace a new roof, holding that a genuine factual dispute existed over whether the roof was a prohibited “metal roof” ¹. The opinion, Lock Properties LLC v. Kelly Plantation Owners Association, Inc., is short, but it offers useful guidance for boards, association counsel and owners on how far a mandatory injunction can reach.

The dispute

Lock Properties, whose managing member is Henry Lock, replaced the roof on a house in the Kelly Plantation community without the association’s prior approval ¹. The new roof uses a steel underlayment covered with barrel roofing tiles made of stone ¹. The association’s documents require approval before a roof is installed and prohibit “[m]etal roofs” ¹.

The association sued for a permanent injunction, alleging two violations: the roof was installed without approval, and it was a prohibited metal roof ¹. The owner conceded that he did not obtain approval but denied that the roof was a metal roof ¹. The county court granted summary judgment for the association, found the roof was a metal roof, and ordered it removed and replaced ¹.

What the First District held

The court reversed on two grounds. First, everyone agreed the roof contained metal and was covered with stone tiles ¹. Whether a metal underlayment makes the whole system a “metal roof” was a genuine dispute of material fact, which made summary judgment inappropriate ¹.

Second, the court addressed the injunction itself. An association enforcing a restrictive covenant need not prove irreparable injury or the lack of an adequate legal remedy ¹. Still, an association does not have unlimited authority to enforce covenants by mandatory injunction, and an owner may defend by showing that the association acted unreasonably or arbitrarily ¹. The association effectively conceded that forcing removal would be unreasonable if the roof is not a prohibited metal roof, explaining that if an owner installed an “indisputably compliant” roof without approval and then sought approval, the association could approve it and removal would be unnecessary ¹. The failure to seek approval alone could not support the remove-and-replace order ¹. The case returns to the trial court ¹.

Lessons for boards and owners

The decision fits within the statutory framework that already governs architectural control. Section 720.3035 permits an association to review and approve improvements only to the extent the authority is specifically stated or reasonably inferred in the declaration or authorized guidelines, and requires the association to apply those standards reasonably and equitably to all owners ³. Undefined terms such as “metal roof” invite exactly the kind of factual dispute that prevented summary judgment here ¹.

The case also shows why these disputes are good candidates for early resolution. Under section 720.311, disputes between an association and an owner over changes to a parcel and other covenant enforcement disputes must be the subject of a written demand for presuit mediation before they are filed in court ². A motion for temporary injunctive relief may be filed without first mediating when emergency relief is required ². Presuit mediation is privileged and confidential to the same extent as court-ordered mediation ².

Practical points for both sides:

• Define the restriction. A board can clarify ambiguous standards through its guidelines rather than litigating the meaning of a single word ³.
• Separate the approval violation from the substance. The court treated the missed approval as insufficient, by itself, to justify tearing off a roof ¹.
• Consider an after-the-fact application. The association’s own concession points to a path in which a compliant roof is reviewed and approved ¹.
• Use mediation before the expense escalates. An owner facing removal of a new roof and an association facing fee exposure on appeal both have reasons to talk early ².

Tony Roca mediates HOA and condominium disputes, including the presuit mediation required for many HOA disputes under section 720.311, Florida Statutes. Boards, managers, owners and counsel can check his availability and book a mediation online, by Zoom statewide.