And, At That, It Was 30% Less Than the HOA Request For Award Of Fees! If you visit our “Homeowner Associations” category, you can see a vast array of awards both in favor of homeowners and in favor of homeowner associations (HOAs). We will just say this, the trial court decisions on who gets […]
Ending Appellate Court Comment Urges Homeowners and HOAs To Work It Out, Rather Than Run To Court, Saying “Amen” To Trial Judge’s Closing Observation. In Artus v. Gramercy Tower Condominium Assn., Case No. A161265 (1st Dist., Div. 2 Mar. 30, 2022) (published), a homeowner sued an HOA over election voting rules and sale/leasing guidelines.
$157,146.44 Was Fee Assessment Against Homeowners Arising Out Of Landscape Dispute. In a somewhat complimentary unpublished decision to Harris v. Rojas (a Second District decision we posted on recently), the Third District in Winchester Community Assn. v. Perrotta, Case No. C085295 (3d Dist. July 20, 2021) (unpublished) had to review a discretionary “prevailing party”
Homeowners Did Achieve Their Pragmatic Objective, So Davis-Stirling Fees Were Justified. In Champir v. Fairbanks Ranch Assn., Case No. D077384 (4th Dist., Div. 1 June 22, 2021) (unpublished), which we reviewed when it was unpublished in our June 29, 2021 post, homeowners received a substantial fee award for prevailing against HOA under a Davis-Stirling Act fee
Parties’ Inability To Mediate Was A Discretionary Factor To Weigh In The Fee Calculus. HOA, in Country Glen Oak Park Homeowners Assn. v. Garrett, Case No. B303220 (2d Dist., Div. 6 July 6, 2021) (unpublished), won a case to require removal of a pool equipment encroachment by homeowners as well as $820 in compensatory
Plaintiffs Dismissed Their Action Only After Achieving Their Main Litigation Objective. In Champir v. Fairbanks Ranch Assn., Case No. D077384 (4th Dist., Div. 1 June 22, 2021) (unpublished), plaintiffs sued homeowners’ association for breach of the CCR’s stemming from association’s decision to install traffic lights at a location not approved by a majority of
HOA View Disputes Can Be Costly. Under this category, we have indicated that fee awards can be costly for homeowners and homeowner associations/directors/property managers/neighboring homeowners caught in the middle of “view protection” disputes. The next case is yet another example of that. In Davis v. Irvine Terrace Community Assn., Case Nos. G057682/G058266 (4th
$154,744 In Fees Was Requested. One Ford Road Homeowners Assn. v. Johnson, Case No. G058269 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Dec. 17, 2020) (unpublished), is just a reminder about how expensive HOA/homeowners disputes can be. Here, HOA won a CC&R dispute which was reversed on appeal as a matter of law. That resulted in an
The Davis-Stirling Act Fee-Shifting Provision, Section 5975(c), Mandates The Award Of Fees To The Prevailing Party With The Trial Court's Only Discretion Being To Determine The Reasonable Amount Of Fees. Hope Ranch Park Homes Assoc. v. Rubin, Case No. B299932 (2d Dist., Div. 6 December 14, 2020) (unpublished) involved a $30,600 penalty assessed against
$313,721 Was The Fee Order Request. We have many times indicated that HOA-homeowner disputes can be expensive as far as fee-shifting is concerned. Lastavich v. Nob Hills Homeowners Assn., Case No. D075466 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Dec. 2, 2020) (unpublished) is an illustration of how this panned out in a real case. There,
