Cases: Homeowner Associations

Homeowner Associations: $390,668 Fee Award To HOA Affirmed When Appellate Court Affirmed HOA Interpretation Of Palm Tree View CC&Rs And Accompanying Policies

Cases: Homeowner Associations

HOA Interpretation Of Palm Tree View Policies Was Correct, Such That It Was The Prevailing Party.             Over the years, because a lot of us live in common interest developments, we are used to seeing homeowner association fights with homeowners, many occurring based on view restriction or tree limitations—generating plenty of disputes by both sides.  […]

Homeowner Associations, Special Fee Shifting Statutes: Error In Lower Court’s Narrow Interpretation Of Civil Code Section 5975(c) Led To Reversal Of Attorney Fees Denial To Prevailing Defendants

Cases: Homeowner Associations, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

Gravamen Of Plaintiff’s Complaint Was On Enforceability Of The Governing Documents.             In Alexander v. Singletary, Case No. D075943 (4th Dist., Div. 1 January 21, 2020) (unpublished), one of five homeowners in a common interest development unsuccessfully sought judicial declaration that the governing documents were unenforceable as to him, and for partition from the

Homeowner Associations, Section 1717: $220,000 Fee Award To HOA Under CC&Rs Fees Clause Was Proper

Cases: Homeowner Associations, Cases: Section 1717

Plaintiff’s Unsuccessful Action Was Founded On CC&Rs Rights, Not Just Solely Sounding In Tort; HOA; Directors Had Sought $322,840 In Fees.             HOA and HOA directors were awarded $220,000 in attorney’s fees against an unsuccessful plaintiff bringing a suit to challenge HOA’s policies and CC&Rs about parking and the permitting process, as well as enforcement

Appealability, Homeowner Associations, Prevailing Party, Special Fee Shifting Statutes: Second District Affirms $67,458.07 Attorneys’ Fees Awarded To Prevailing Defendant On Remand

Cases: Appealability, Cases: Homeowner Associations, Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

Gravamen of Plaintiffs’ Action Was Based On Governing CC&Rs Which Made Defendant Prevailing Party For Attorneys’ Fees Purposes When She Defeated The Action Through Demurrers And Plaintiffs’ Voluntary Dismissal.             We first discussed our next case – Durack v. Wang, Case No. B293597 (2d Dist., Div. 7 November 18, 2019) (unpublished) – in a

Allocation, Homeowner Associations, Interest, Special Fee Shifting Statutes, Standard of Review: Plaintiff Owner/Developer’s Award Of $1,673,691 In Damages and Entire Fee Request Upheld On Appeal

Cases: Allocation, Cases: Homeowner Associations, Cases: Interest, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes, Cases: Standard of Review

Defendant HOA’s Breach Of Owner/Developer’s Valid Contractual Access Rights Was The Common Core Involved In The Causes Of Action, So Apportionment Of Fees Not Required.             In Millennium-Diamond Road Partners v. Diamond Bar etc., Case No. B285539 (2nd Dist., Div. 3 Sept. 24, 2019) (unpublished), Owner/Developer Millennium sued HOA when it revoked Millennium’s access

Homeowner Associations: Adams Stirling Law Firm In Los Angeles Has An Excellent Summary Of Fee Shifting Provisions With Respect To HOA And Davis-Stirling Act Issues

Cases: Homeowner Associations

Numerous Civil Code and CCP Provisions, As Well Case Law, Summarized By The Firm On Its Website.             We would like to thank Adams Stirling, a Los Angeles law firm specializing in HOA issues, for its excellent summary of HOA and Davis-Stirling Act fees issues and case law, which we post verbatim below and which

Homeowner Associations: Defendant Condo Owner Voluntarily Dismissed From Suit Against HOA And Condo Owner By Other Condo Owners Before Trial Improperly Denied Fee Recovery Under Both Davis-Stirling Act And Code Of Civil Procedure Section 1032(a)(4)

Cases: Homeowner Associations

Suit Did Involve CC&Rs, And Defendant Did Prevail By Being Dismissed, Such That Reversal Means Defendant Condo Owner Will Get Some Fees On Remand.             Fee entitlement and prevailing party determinations often are matters of law, as they were here where the pleadings and facts made a reversal of a fee denial – something which

Homeowner Associations: Homeowners Were Not Catalysts For Easement Agreement Assumption, Because They Wanted A More Expansive Amendment

Cases: Homeowner Associations

HOA Was Prevailing Party Under Easement Agreement Fees Clause, Awarded Its Fully Requested $51,460 In Fees.              In Lemley v. Aliso Homeowners Assn., Inc., Case No. B288789 (2d Dist., Div. 3 July 3, 2019; posted July 5, 2019) (unpublished), HOA and homeowners got entangled in an easement agreement dispute in which homeowners wanted specific performance/declaratory

Homeowner Associations: Homeowner Prevailing In Unlawful Foreclosure Of Condo Unit Case Was Entitled To $434,000 In Damages And $720,000 In Attorney’s Fees

Cases: Homeowner Associations

Both Civil Code Section 1354 (Now Section 5975) And CC&R Fee Clause Were In Play.              Yikes!  Talk about a change in fortune based on a prior appeal.  Homeowner finally won, obtaining damages and substantial attorney’s fees for hanging in there to the end.             In Multani v. Castle Green Homeowners Assn., Case No.

Homeowner Associations, Private Attorney General, Section 1717: Defendant Homeowners Winning A Tree Dispute With Another Homeowner Neighbor Rightfully Denied Attorney’s Fees Under CC&Rs, Civil Code Section 1717, And Private Attorney General Statute

Cases: Homeowner Associations, Cases: Private Attorney General (CCP 1021.5), Cases: Section 1717

However, A Dissenting Justice Would Have Found Fee Entitlement Under CC&Rs And Section 1717.            The next case, Shah v. Ross, Case No. B286783 (2d Dist., Div. 5 April 25, 2019) (unpublished), involved a situation where defendants/homeowner neighbors won a tree dispute initiated by fellow plaintiff homeowner. Defendants then sought fees under a CC&Rs fees clause,

Scroll to Top