Cases: Homeowner Associations

  Trial Court Properly Denied Fee to Either Side, Says Court of Appeal.      Don’t assume that the prevailing party determination for an award of routine costs and attorney’s fees under Civil Code section 1717/fee-shifting statutes is the same. They do differ, as the next case demonstrates.      In Duclos v. Marina Pacifica Homeowners Assn.,

  $88,671 Fee Award Entered Against Both Property Owners and Occupants.      Losing HOA disputes can be costly for homeowners, because Civil Code section 1354 has a mandatory fee-shifting directive in favor of a prevailing party successfully enforcing CC&Rs. It can also extend to non-owner occupants, as the litigants in the next case learned.     

  Fourth District, Division 3 Finds No Contractual Basis For Award, But Does Find a Statutory Basis.      In an interesting first impression issue, the Fourth District, Division 3—in Renezeder v. Emerald Bay Community Assn., Case Nos. G040657 & G041353 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Feb. 8, 2010) (unpublished)—determined that winning interveners in a CC&R dispute

Fourth District, Division 1 Finds Homeowner Did Not Prevail, But HOA Was Entitled to Fee Recovery.      Without meaning to be preachy, we have on numerous occasions—in line with our Mission Statement—reminded readers that litigation happiness or sadness often times boils down to who recovers or who gets socked with fees at the end of

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,