- Colyear v. Rolling Hills Community Association of Rancho Palos Verdes
9 Cal.App.5th 119 (2017)[Dispute Resolution; Anti-SLAPP] An action by a HOA member to invoke a HOA’s dispute resolution process over a tree-trimming covenant was a matter of public interest and thus constitutionally protected activity.
- Tract No. 7260 Association, Inc. v. Parker
(2017) 10 Cal.App.5th 24[Membership List; Inspection Denial] A homeowners association (HOA) may restrict a member’s request for access to the HOA’s membership list when the request is for an improper purpose.
- Parrott v. Mooring Townhomes Association
(2003) 112 Cal.App.4th 873[Attorney’s Fees; Prevailing Party] The court found the Association to be the prevailing party and awarded its attorney fees after homeowners filed a request for dismissal of complaint.
- Mashiri v. Epsten Grinnell & Howell
(2017) 845 F.3d 984[FDCPA; Collection Notice] Homeowner successfully alleged that HOA law firm violated FDCPA because pre-lien notice payment demand timeline was inconsistent with the right under the FDCPA to dispute the debt within 30 days of receipt of letter.
- Almanor Lakeside Villas Owners Association v. Carson
(2016) 246 Cal.App.4th 761[Attorney’s Fees; Prevailing Party] Where both sides achieved some positive net effect as a result of the court’s ruling, a prevailing party determination is made by comparing the practical effect of the relief attained by each; After resolving the issue of prevailing party in an action to enforce the governing documents, a trial court has ...
- Nellie Gail Ranch Owners Association v. McMullin
(2016) 4 Cal.App.5th 982[Encroachments; Trespass; Adverse Possession] A homeowner may not establish an adverse possession claim over HOA common area without showing that the homeowner paid all property taxes for the disputed area; Equitable easements may not be granted to an encroaching homeowner whose trespass was willful or negligent.
- Mission Shores Association v. Pheil
(2008) 83 Cal.App.4th 789[Amendments to CC&Rs; Rent Restriction] An amendment to the CC&Rs which empowered the HOA to evict tenants who violate the CC&Rs was held to be reasonable.
- Grossman v. Park Fort Washington Association
(2012) 212 Cal. App. 4th 1128[Attorney’s Fees; ADR; Pre-Litigation] Pre-litigation attorney’s fees that are incurred in alternative dispute resolution (ADR) are recoverable by the prevailing party in subsequent ligation.
- Rancho Mirage Country Club Homeowners Association v. Hazelbaker
(2016) 2 Cal.App.5th 252[Attorney’s Fees; ADR; Settlement Agreement] An action to enforce a settlement agreement reached between a HOA and an owner through Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) was held to be an action to enforce the governing documents entitling the prevailing party to an award of attorney’s fees and costs pursuant to Civ. Code § 5975.
- Woodridge Escondido Property Owners Association v. Nielson
(2005) 130 Cal.App.4th 559[Architectural Control] A HOA’s architectural committee does not have the authority to approve an improvement which is in violation of the CC&Rs.