Trial Court Did Not Abuse Its Discretion In Awarding All Requested Fees But 10 Hours On Unsuccessful Matters.
Homeowners association, in this one, must have felt the sting of statutory fee-shifting provisions which allowed the property owners to recover $112,665 in fees based on winning a dispute over the correct interpretation of CC&Rs.
Grossman v. Park Fort Washington Assn., Case No. F063125 (5th Dist. Dec. 19, 2012) (unpublished) involved a dispute between an HOA and property owners building a cabana and fireplace in owners’ backyard without obtaining prior HOA consent. The trial court found that property owners correctly advanced an interpretation of the CC&Rs allowing the cabana and fireplace with minor modifications and without any imposition of HOA fines. Then, property owners were awarded $112,665 (out of a requested $116,165) in attorney’s fees, with the lower court deducting 10 hours for unsuccessful litigation maneuvers based upon a mandatory statutory fee-shifting provision (Civ. Code, § 1354(c).)
Outdoor fireplace on which cranberry pickers do their cooking. Arthur Rothstein, photographer. 1938. Library of Congress.
The appellate court affirmed the fee award.
It first determined that the property owners’ fees incurred in pursuing mandatory HOA ADR/mediation efforts should certainly be recovered–after all, they are mandatory, which strongly implies that they should be allowed as recoverable fees.
The Court of Appeal then determined that there was no abuse of discretion in allocating out 10 hours of work for unsuccessful endeavors, affirming the fee award.
