Recent Court Rulings

Facts: A guest of homeowners in a planned residential community was attacked and killed by an alligator. Before the community was developed, the land within and surrounding its boundaries was largely marsh, where indigenous alligators lived. In order to develop the property, the association installed a lagoon system that allowed enough drainage to create an area suitable for a residential development. After the project was completed in the 1970s, the indigenous alligators subsequently began to move in and out of the community through its lagoon systems.

Facts: Members in a planned community sued the homeowners association, arguing that their deed didn't require them to pay semiannual assessments to the association. The members asked a trial court for a declaratory judgment that they weren't required to pay the assessments. The association asked the trial court for a judgment in its favor without a trial, which the court granted. The homeowners appealed.

Decision: A Massachusetts appeals court upheld the decision in favor of the association and dismissed the case.

Facts: A member who lived in a planned townhouse community ran for town council and posted two signs in support of his candidacy at his home—one inside a window and another inside a door. The association's governing documents banned all residential signs except “For Sale” signs. The declaration precluded signs “in or upon any Building, the Common Facilities, or any part thereof without the prior written consent of the Board.” However, no written guidelines existed to direct the board's discretion in this area.

Facts: The manager of a townhouse community hired a snow removal company to perform snow removal services. Under its maintenance contract with the association, the company was responsible for removing snow from the streets, sidewalks, driveways, and parking lots within the property's common area. After a large snowstorm occurred, the company began removing the snow from the association's common elements, but finished clearing other areas the following day.

Facts: Four of the 23 homeowners within a community association sued the board of directors, claiming that the undertaking of certain expenditures using association funds was outside the scope of the board's powers as enumerated in the declaration, bylaws, and house rules. Specifically, the group claimed that the expenditure of funds for the hiring of an engineer and the procurement of permits, designs, and surveys in connection with a sewer connection project is unauthorized by the governing documents.

Facts: A condo owner in an adult-only community was barred for a two-year period from using the community's recreational facilities and common areas, which included a recreation center, a swimming pool, and tennis courts, for interfering with other members' use of the facilities. He was also fined by the association for the behavior.

Facts: A condo association's manager discovered that it had failed to invoice the correct monthly dues for 10 months to the 36 members of the association. As a result of this billing error, there was an $8,521.50 shortfall. With the association's permission, the manager divided the total of $8,521.50 by the number of members, and tried to collect a one-time charge of $236.71 from each. A certain member had paid her monthly and quarterly assessments and dues in a timely manner until that point but refused to pay the assessment.

Facts: A luxury recreational vehicle (RV) park association allowed the owners of lots in the park to rent them to non-owners. To regulate lot renting, the association's board of directors enacted three resolutions that imposed requirements for owners to meet before renting their lots, such as identification requirements and ensuring available liability insurance. The resolutions also imposed rental fees to be paid by owners and penalties for nonpayment of the fees.

Facts: A son submitted one application for himself and another for his mother to rent two units in a condo building that was run by an association. The lease for the son's unit was conditioned on approval of the lease for both units. Along with their applications, the mother and son requested an exception to the association's no-pet policy so that the 95-year-old mother, who suffered from mental and physical disabilities, could keep her emotional support dog.

Facts: A planned unit development (PUD) zoning ordinance established a residential community with a homeowners association. The association's declaration had a restrictive covenant banning members from operating businesses from their homes. The association later discovered that two members were running day care businesses in their homes, which violated the restrictive covenant in the declaration.