PBA Holdings has sued its development partner, that partner's parent company and its land-use attorneys in Palm Beach County Circuit Court, alleging in a new complaint that they worked to defeat the Project Tango data center approval.
Last updated Aug 17, 2026, 08:08 am EDT
The Central Park Commerce Center sits on the north side of State Road 80 near 20-Mile Bend in Loxahatchee, where Palm Beach County commissioners denied the Project Tango master plan amendment on July 15, 2026.
LOXAHATCHEE, FL — The company behind the rejected Project Tango data center has sued its own development partner, that partner's Atlanta parent company, the property's master association and the law firm that opposed the project at two county hearings, alleging they worked to defeat an approval the partner was obligated to support.
PBA Holdings, Inc. filed the complaint Aug. 6, 2026, in Palm Beach County Circuit Court. The case, PBA Holdings, Inc. v. WPB Logistics Owner, LLC, et al., is Case No. 50-2026-CA-008952-XXXA-MB in the civil division of the 15th Judicial Circuit. Also named are TPA Group, LLC, Central Park Commerce Center Master Association, Inc., the law firm Lewis, Longman & Walker, P.A., Matthew Prince and attorney Tara Duhy. Ethan J. Loeb of Bartlett Loeb Hinds Thompson & Angelos in Tampa signed the filing.
The dispute centers on the Central Park Commerce Center, an approximately 202-acre planned development near 20-Mile Bend at 20125 State Road 80 in Loxahatchee, beside Florida Power & Light's West County Energy Center. Palm Beach County commissioners voted 5-1 on July 15 to deny the master plan amendment PBA sought there, the request the county processed as Project Tango.
According to the complaint, PBA sold the property's Phase 1 parcel to WPB Logistics in February 2023 under a 2021 agreement that limited Phase 1 and a future Phase 2 to warehouse and office space, while PBA kept a separate data center parcel. An August 2025 amendment required PBA to pursue warehouse entitlements for Phase 2 and barred WPB Logistics from unreasonably withholding approval, the lawsuit alleges.
WPB Logistics consented to the county application in October 2025, the complaint states, then objected in a March 19, 2026, letter and moved to withdraw consent on March 31. The lawsuit alleges those stated reasons were not the real ones, and that WPB Logistics was privately preparing to convert its own warehouse entitlements to data center use administratively, using electrical capacity PBA had spent years securing.
The complaint further alleges Prince, identified as a TPA Group director, principal of WPB Logistics and president of the master association, used the association to oppose PBA without a board meeting, vote or the consent the governing declaration requires from PBA, its only other member.
Much of the filing concerns Duhy, a shareholder and president of Lewis, Longman & Walker, who spoke against the application at the county Zoning Commission on July 2 and before commissioners on July 15. The lawsuit alleges she misstated the effect of the application and the county's land development code, represented two clients with conflicting interests, and met privately with commissioners without county counsel present after her clients had added the Board of County Commissioners as a defendant in a separate injunction case. Those allegations are unproven, and no court has found any ethics violation.
That earlier case was filed June 5 and amended July 10 to name the county board. Circuit Judge Darren Shull denied the plaintiffs' amended emergency injunction motion on July 13, according to an order attached as an exhibit, and the complaint says the master association dismissed its claims on July 18.
Exhibits also set out WPB Logistics' side. In the March 19 letter, the company argued public opposition to Project Tango was damaging its ability to develop, market and finance Phase 1, cited the county mayor's statements against the project, said it had an offer above $100 million for Phase 1, and demanded PBA withdraw the application.
The complaint brings 10 counts, including breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, aiding and abetting, abuse of process and tortious interference. PBA seeks damages exceeding $50,000, costs, interest and attorney's fees on several counts, an expedited order compelling the association to open its books under Florida's not-for-profit corporation statute, and a jury trial.
The filing reviewed by Boca Post does not include a response from any defendant. Boca Post reviewed the complaint and its exhibits, Case No. 50-2026-CA-008952-XXXA-MB, filed Aug. 6, 2026, in Palm Beach County Circuit Court. The case is newly filed and pending. The allegations above are claims made in a court filing. They have not been proven, and no defendant has been found liable.
Boca Post tracks civil court filings across Palm Beach County, including lawsuits involving businesses, residents, property disputes, associations, and local organizations. Follow our Palm Beach County Lawsuits coverage for recent filings.
A complaint contains allegations that have not been proven. Being sued is not a finding of liability.
If we misstated a fact from the filing, we will correct it. If you are a named party, send us a statement in your own words and we will add it to this article as a clearly labeled response. If the case has been dismissed, settled, or decided, send us the documentation. Whether we update the article depends on the outcome and is our editorial decision.