Recent Court Rulings

Facts: After purchasing undeveloped townhome lots, a residential property company refused to pay assessments to the association as required under the community’s restrictive covenants. The company asserted that the assessments for water and trash collection for its lots was arbitrary because the empty lots didn’t have houses yet that would require trash collection or water.

Facts: An association sued a general contractor because of drainage issues that became apparent in the community after construction had been completed. The drainage plan developed and installed by the contractor during construction but before the association had taken ownership of the property was inadequate, which caused standing water to collect in the common areas between the units. The members of the association brought the drainage and resulting flooding problems to the attention of the contractor.

Facts: A planned community consisted of 124 single-family homes. In addition to these homes, the same developer built three waterfront condominium buildings nearby. The association tried to treat the unit owners from the area nearby as if they were association members that were subject to the association’s fees and rules and regulations.

Facts: The employee of a general contractor was hired by an association to do work in the community. He was injured after he separated a two-part extension ladder owned by his employer. Using the part of the ladder that didn’t have traction feet, he gained access to a roof. On the way down the ladder, which was neither secured to the building nor being held by another person, he slipped and fell.

Facts: A homeowner in an association renovated his three-level unit in order to use the first level, a garage area, as living space. The garage had a “man door,” an entryway that allows access without opening the garage door. The renovation was permitted by the City of San Diego. The association sued the owner, challenging the renovation. A trial court ruled in favor of the association. It ordered the owner to undo the changes. The owner complied with the court’s order, and the city performed a final inspection and issued a certificate of occupancy.

Facts: A homeowners association’s board of directors sought to amend the bylaws. The amendment initially failed, and the board announced that it would continue holding elections until the amendment passed. In the association’s newsletter, the board told members to vote for the amendment.

Facts: A homeowner bought a property in a subdivision specifically because it had a mountain view. Several years later, the owner notified the association’s architectural review board (ARB) that certain cottonwood trees on her neighbor’s property were obstructing her view. She requested that theassociation remedy the situation either through extensive pruning or removal of the trees.

Facts: After an association denied two owners’ request to install a new asphalt roof on their home using materials not authorized by the “2006 Roof Specifications” portion of the bylaws of the association, the owners sued the association and 16 individual homeowners in the community. A trial court dismissed the claims against the individual homeowners. The association asked the court for a judgment in its favor without a trial, which was granted.

Facts: An association sued two of its members to collect outstanding assessment dues and charges required from property owners in the community to maintain the neighborhood, pay for a private police force, and pay management fees. The members hadn’t paid dues for nearly four years.

Facts: Two homeowners submitted a bid to buy a foreclosed residential property in their planned community. The president and managing broker of the association also submitted a bid to the same bank to purchase the property on behalf of his clients, a couple who didn’t live in the community. The bank accepted the owners’ bid.