Cases: Homeowner Associations

Homeowner Associations: Ouch!—Condo Owner Stung With $238,000 Fees/Costs Award After Losing Contentious Battle Over Using Disputed Floor Tile In Unit

Cases: Homeowner Associations, Cases: Reasonableness of Fees

  Fourth District, Division 1 Finds Award Disproportionate At First Glance, But Affirms Based Upon Total Review of the Litigation Below.      Homeowner-homeowner association battles can be very, very contentious and expensive for the losing side—as the next homeowner learned, in a dispute over the floor covering in his condominium unit.      McGuire v. 235 […]

Homeowners Associations: Fourth District, Division 3 Affirms Fee Awards Totaling $188,000 To The Chagrin Of Losing Homeowner

Cases: Homeowner Associations

Presiding Justice Sills Sustains Fee Awards on Behalf of 3-0 Panel.      If one is prone to read lots of appellate opinions (as we are), distinctive styles come through by various appellate justices authoring the cases assigned to them. That happens to be the case in the next decision we review—Presiding Justice Sills, the author,

Homeowner Associations: Two Neighbors Duke It Out—One Neighbor Finally Prevails On Appeal, Meaning A Prior Denial of Fees Was Erroneous

Cases: Homeowner Associations, Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Section 1717

Fourth District, Division 3 Remands for Fee Redetermination in “Acrid Dispute Between Neighbors.”      Disputes between homeowner associations and members or neighbors in a common interest subdivision seem to result in overboilings of emotions and (ultimately) litigation resources. Many times, the final result—where both sides seek to recoup hefty attorney’s fees—results in a “wash,” with

Homeowner Associations: Losing Condo Homeowners Associations Not Subject To Fee Exposure When Losing Action Against Past Board Member Defendants

Cases: Estoppel, Cases: Homeowner Associations, Cases: Section 1717

Purchase Agreement Fees Clause Did Not Apply Because Plaintiff Was Not A Condo Buyer.      One of the first rules of fee entitlement is that you need a contractual or statutory basis to trump the American Rule that each sides bears its own attorney’s fees in a case. That principle sunk the winning defendants’ request

Special Fee Shifting Provisions: Financial Condition Of Indigent Litigant Is A Factor To Consider

Cases: Homeowner Associations, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

Second District, Seven 7 So Holds Under Civil Code Section 1354(c), But Splinters Badly in the Process.      We all know that fundamental access to the courts is more than just rhetoric; it is a bulwark of our whole legal system. This principle took “front and center” importance in the next case, where entitlement to

SLAPP Two-Fer: Fees Go POOF! Because No Amended Complaint On File And HOA Director Stung With Fees After Losing SLAPP Appeal

Cases: Homeowner Associations, Cases: SLAPP

Second District, Division 7 Issues Two Unpublished Opinions on SLAPP.      In our category “SLAPP,” we have explored cases where defendants have been victorious in winning mandatory attorney’s fees awards after prevailing in anti-SLAPP motions. The statutory basis for such fee entitlement is Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16(c). Division 7 of the Second District

Homeowner Associations: Third District Reverses Fee Award Under Civil Code Section 1354, But Remands For Recalculation Based On Corporations Code Section 317

Cases: Homeowner Associations

  Third District Gives Mixed Blessing to Fee Victor.      What happens when a fee award is not sustainable on one ground but correct on another? Answer: a remand, with directions to recalculate the award under the proper fee entitlement statute. The next case—Klamath River Development Co. v. Preston, Case Nos. C054002 & C055369 (3d

Scroll to Top