Recent Court Rulings

Facts: Homeowners in a planned community installed a lattice attached to the top of a fence in their backyard to provide additional privacy. The association sent the homeowners a violation notice demanding that they remove the lattice. The homeowners were advised by an association representative that they were not entitled to a hearing concerning the violation. They removed the lattice and installed a privacy screen that, according to the homeowners, was built in accordance with specifications given to them by the association representative.

Facts: Several homeowners in a planned community kept hens on their lots. The association informed them that this violated the association’s covenants. The covenants disallow “animals, birds, or poultry” on residents’ lots unless kept as “recognized household pets.” The owners claimed that their hens met the recognized household pet exception. The association argued that the term “recognized household pets” isn’t defined in the covenants, which were, therefore, ambiguous.

Facts: After the owners of a unit hadn’t paid assessments for several months, a condominium association filed a forcible entry and detainer action. At a trial, the association presented testimony from the president of its board of directors and an employee of the management company. They both testified that the unit owners had been given the required notice that the assessments were past due and that, if they weren’t paid, the association would take possession of the unit.

Facts: A condominium building association attempted to foreclose on two liens against a unit in the building. The liens were for unpaid common area charges. The unit owner asserted that the association was required to comply with a state property law, which requires that this type of action be carried out in the same manner as an action to foreclose on a mortgage. That is, a notice must be served with the summons and complaint.

Facts: An association foreclosed on a lot in its community after the member failed to pay for maintenance fees and other amounts assessed against it. The member sued the association and its management company. She alleged that the association had engaged in fraud for filing an “invalid and inaccurate lien and foreclosure.” She asked the court for $2 million in damages.

A circuit court granted the association’s request for a judgment in its favor without a trial. It also declared the member a “vexatious litigant.” The member appealed.

Facts: After a homeowner stopped paying his association dues, the association filed a notice of lien and election to sell his home. The homeowner didn’t pay the delinquent dues, and the association sold the home at foreclosure, to itself, for a minimal amount. The homeowner sued for wrongful foreclosure, and the district court ultimately ruled in favor of the association without a trial. It also awarded the association attorney’s fees. The homeowner appealed.

Facts: A renter in a condominium building slipped and fell on ice, suffering injuries. She sued the condo unit owner, the association, and the management company for breach of contract under the theory of implied warranty of habitability, and negligence. All three parties asked a district court to dismiss the claims.

Decision: A Pennsylvania district court denied the parties’ request and ordered a trial.

Facts: A condominium building contained several residential units and one unit for commercial use. When the condominium was initially built, the board of directors was run by the sponsor. It permitted the commercial tenant to install an HVAC unit on the rooftop common area. Several unit owners became board members later. On behalf of all owners, a board member sued the commercial tenant—a business owned by the sponsor.

Facts: Two association homeowners tried to sell their home to an organization that planned to use it as housing for three disabled adults. The association tried to block the sale of the house, citing a restrictive covenant in the governing documents, which specified that homes in the community must be used as “single family” residences.

Facts: Fifty-five units in a Missouri condominium complex went into foreclosure. Delinquent assessments and fines were due on all of the units. A corporation bought the units. It paid the assessments and fees that had accrued after the foreclosure and its purchase, but not before. The association later claimed that it had an assessment lien on all 55 units, because of the pre-purchase outstanding amounts.