$180 Hourly Rates Certainly Reasonable, With Nothing in Record Showing Abuse of Discretion. We have seen many homeowners getting stung badly by fee awards in favor of prevailing HOAs, which counsels that parties in HOA disputes try to work things out or go to mediation to avoid big fee run-ups. In The […]
This One May Have Interesting Repercussions In HOA Lien Enforcement Actions. Huntington Cont’l Town House Assn. v. JM Trust, 2014 Cal.App. LEXIS 41 (Orange County Superior Court Appellate Division) (Jan. 13, 2014) (published) is an interesting decision in the HOA assessment lien enforcement area. In essence, the superior court appellate division decided that
Well, we are closing out a year, but our intermediate California Courts of Appeal are still busy. Here are two from the Second District, Division 6. Smith v. Vista Grande, Inc., Case No. B242332 (2d Dist., Div. 6 Dec. 31, 2013) (Unpublished) – Homeowners Association. Lighting hot water heater in house at
Issue Is Whether Prevailing Homeowner Entitled To Civil Code Section 1354 Fees When HOA Found Not To Be A CID. On May 16, 2013, we posted on the unpublished Second District decision of Tract 19051 Homeowners Assn. v. Kemp, Case No. B235015 (2d Dist., Div. 4 May 15, 2013). In this decision, the
In many respects, Tract 19051 Homeowners Assn. v. Kemp, Case No. B235015 (2d Dist., Div. 4 May 15, 2013) (unpublished) was not a difficult decision once the liminal legal issue was decided. Because no common interest development was involved, a defense award of fees had to be overturned under Civil Code section 1354.
In Hoofman v. Pacific Crest Community Assn., Case No. B230036 (2d Dist., Div. 1 Apr. 16, 2013) (unpublished), an HOA won some breach of fiduciary claims against homeowners. However, they were denied fee recovery. The appellate court affirmed, finding that the win on the breach of fiduciary claims did not fall within the
KO for HOA. Boy, have we told you that homeowner associations or homeowners can belly ache about fee awards to a prevailing party under Civil Code section 1354(c) [fee shifting statute applicable to enforcement of CC&Rs] or Civil Code section 1717 [fee shifting clause applicable to contractual fee clauses]. Well, homeowner got the
Under Civil Code section 1354, the fee-shifting provisions relating to CC&R disputes between homeowners and HOAs, the prevailing party is determined based on who practically won–identical to the standard under Civil Code section 1717. In Pope v. Oaks of Calabasas HOA, Case No. B237442 (2d Dist., Div. 5 Feb. 13, 2013) (unpublished),
Court of Appeal, Facing Some Gnarly Procedural Issues, Finds Trial Court Denial Was Correct. Gunn v. Superior Court (Mai Kai Community Assn.), Case No. G046989 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Feb. 7, 2013) (unpublished) was a situation where an HOA voluntarily dismissed without prejudice an action after a homeowner early on relented and allowed
If there is one area where acrimony is evident, it is homeowner/neighbor/HOA battles. The problem, in line with our Mission Statement, is that the fee recovery can be crushing, far outweighing the probable importance of the litigation. That is what happened in Mestler v. Johnson, Case No. D058869 (4th Dist., Div. 1
