Fetes & Events Prevails in Miami Hall Dispute Verdict
Table of Contents
Case Background
This case took place in Miami-Dade County between a local charitable organization and its long time event manager. The dispute centered on control over a historic community hall located at 270 Catalonia Avenue, Coral Gables. The Plaintiff, K. of C. Council Hall Club, Inc., better known as the Knights of Columbus Council No. 3274, filed the lawsuit against Fetes & Events, Inc., an event management company they had hired years earlier.
The controversy grew from allegations that Fetes overstepped its contractual authority, interfered with the Knights’ charitable activities, and effectively took control of the premises. The Knights of Columbus, a fraternal Catholic service organization, argued that Fetes not only breached its management agreement but also trespassed on the property, violated their privacy, and disrupted fundraising events intended to benefit local students and charitable programs. The case eventually went to trial before the Circuit Court of the 11th Judicial Circuit.
Cause that led to the dispute
The dispute originated from a management agreement signed in 2007, which allowed Fetes to operate the Knights’ hall with strict oversight. The Knights claimed that Fetes began acting as if it owned the property outright. They accused the company of barring them from using their own space, locking them out of key areas, installing unauthorized surveillance equipment, and tampering with fixtures. Events escalated when Fetes allegedly sabotaged the Knights’ annual scholarship fundraiser by turning off lights, disconnecting air conditioning, and hiding necessary equipment.
The Knights contended that Fetes rented out the hall without permission, violated religious guidelines by removing emblems, stored liquor illegally, and even spied on confidential board meetings. They described a pattern of harassment that, according to them, left them unable to conduct their charitable work. As relations broke down, the Knights filed their lawsuit, asserting claims of breach of fiduciary duty, private nuisance, and trespass.
Injury
According to the complaint, the injuries suffered by the Knights extended beyond financial losses. The group alleged reputational harm, disruption of their charitable mission, emotional distress for their members, and interference with their religious activities. Locked out of their own property, they struggled to plan or host events that traditionally supported veterans, orphans, students, and community members in need. Several ceremonial and fraternal functions were either disrupted or cancelled.
They also argued that their control over the hall an essential piece of their history and operations had been compromised by Fetes’ unauthorized activities. The complaint further asserted that surveillance efforts by Fetes violated the Knights’ right to privacy during religious meetings.
Damages
The Knights sought monetary damages exceeding $50,000, claiming breach of contract, trespass, and fiduciary violations. They demanded compensation for their financial losses, repairs to the hall, legal expenses, and damages to their charitable operations and reputation. They also requested attorney’s fees and costs as permitted under Florida law governing such contract disputes. Ultimately, the case focused not only on recovering those sums but also on establishing legal control over the hall’s use and management going forward.
Key Arguments and Proceedings
At trial, the Knights of Columbus argued that Fetes had violated their 2007 management agreement by breaching fiduciary duties, renting out the hall without approval, withholding funds, and disrupting charitable events. They accused Fetes of retaliation, claiming deliberate sabotage during fundraisers, including tampering with air conditioning, hiding tables, and restricting access to key areas of the hall.
Fetes presented a different story. The defense maintained that the Knights had been aware of and accepted their operations for years without complaint. They argued that the sudden objections in 2023 were both late and opportunistic. Fetes claimed that any agreement had been modified by years of unchallenged practice and that the Knights were simply trying to shift blame after benefiting from the arrangement. With both sides presenting conflicting accounts, the dispute went to the jury for a final decision.
Legal Representation
Plaintiff: K. of C. Council Hall Club, Inc.
· Counsel for Plaintiff: Terry A.C. Gray | Martinez-Cid Jordi | Victoria J. Wilson | Peter J Sitaras | Lawrence A Kellogg |
· Expert for Plaintiff: Stuart Neiberg
Defendant: Fetes & Events, Inc.
· Counsel for Defendant: Jonathan K Osborne | Frank A. Florio | Victoria J. Wilson | Michael B Green
Claims
The lawsuit brought by the Knights included three primary claims:
Breach of Fiduciary Duty
The Knights alleged that Fetes owed them a fiduciary duty under the management agreement, requiring Fetes to act in the best interest of the organization. The Knights argued that Fetes breached that duty by locking them out of the hall, failing to account for funds, altering physical spaces without permission, and sabotaging charitable events.
Private Nuisance
The Knights claimed that Fetes’ actions interfered with their rightful use of the hall, particularly during religious and charitable activities. They argued that the disruptions caused emotional distress and prevented the group from fulfilling its charitable mission.
Trespass
The Knights also brought a trespass claim, contending that Fetes unlawfully entered or remained on the property, especially when attending private board meetings or accessing restricted areas of the facility against the Knights’ wishes.
Defense Arguments
Fetes defended itself by arguing that the Knights had known about and consented to its management practices for years. They asserted that any objections raised by the Knights came too late and that Fetes had relied in good faith on the longstanding business relationship. Fetes also contended that no formal damages had resulted from its conduct and that if any obligations were unclear, both sides bore responsibility for failing to clarify the terms earlier in their business dealings.
Further, Fetes claimed that the original management contract had been replaced or modified by subsequent conduct and oral agreements, meaning that they acted appropriately under what they understood to be a revised arrangement.
Jury Verdict
On April 29, 2025, the jury returned its verdict. After careful consideration of the evidence presented at trial, the jury ruled in favor of Fetes & Events, Inc. on all claims. They determined that the Knights of Columbus failed to prove that Fetes breached its fiduciary duty, caused a private nuisance, or committed trespass that resulted in compensable damages.
Court Documents