Search our database of court cases involving homeowners associations, foreclosure, covenant enforcement, and related property rights disputes across the United States.
57 cases found
Springside Condominium Association, Inc. v. The Harpagon Company, LLC
Georgia Court of Appeals
The Springside Condominium Association, Inc. (the Association) appealed the trial court's denial of attorney fees incurred while defending a judgment on appeal. The Court of Appeals of Georgia vacated the trial judge's order and remanded the case for a hearing on the issue of attorney fees. The case originated when Harpagon Company, LLC (Harpagon) filed a petition to quiet title to remove a lien for unpaid assessments filed by the Association, disputing liability for assessments from the date of its tax sale purchase until the owner's redemption right expired. The Association counterclaimed for unpaid assessments and attorney fees, prevailing on its counterclaim. Harpagon's subsequent appeal to the Georgia Supreme Court was dismissed. After remittitur, the Association moved to recover appellate attorney fees under the Georgia Condominium Act. The superior court denied the motion without a hearing, stating no direct authority was cited and it was not an appropriate case for an award. The appellate court found that while general attorney fee statutes don't cover appellate fees, the Georgia Condominium Act (OCGA § 44-3-109(b)(3)) and the Association's by-laws authorize recovery of reasonable attorney fees actually incurred, including those on appeal. Thus, the trial court erred in denying the fees and failing to hold a hearing.
Homeowners v. Homeowners Association
Missouri Supreme Court
The Missouri Supreme Court has ruled in favor of homeowners regarding the installation of solar panels.
Mecklenburg County Superior Court
Jeremy Morris v. West Hayden Estates First Addition Homeowners Association
U.S. District Court (D. Idaho) / U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Idaho lawyer Jeremy Morris, known as the 'Christmas Lawyer', won a settlement against his former homeowners association (HOA) after a protracted legal battle over his elaborate holiday display. The case, which involved a previous jury award of $75,000 in 2019, went through appellate courts and was eventually kicked back from the Supreme Court to the appellate court, leading to a settlement. Morris stated the HOA paid significantly more than the original jury award, and he plans to use the money to expand his Christmas display.
Thai v. Triumvera 600 Naples Court Condominium Association
Illinois Appellate Court, First District
Illinois HOA Risks Liability for IDHR Retaliation
Ridley v. Rancho Palma Grande Homeowners Association
California Court of Appeal, Sixth Appellate District
California Court Affirms $1.8 Million Judgment Against HOA for Failing to Investigate and Remediate Water Intrusion
Homeowner v. Conyers Subdivision HOA
Rockdale County Superior Court
HOA to pay Georgia homeowner $40K settlement after she sued them for a lien on her home
the government v. a Dallas HOA
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
The government spent years probing allegations that a Dallas HOA created rules to kick poor Black people out and that Texas discriminated against minority residents in Houston after Hurricane Harvey, only to suddenly reverse course under Trump.
United States v. Aqua 388 Community Association, et al.
U.S. District Court, Central District of California
On January 22, 2024, the court entered a consent decree in United States v. Aqua 388 Community Association, et al. (C.D. Cal.), a Fair Housing Act (FHA) “election” case. The complaint, filed on April 3, 2023, alleges that the managers of two neighboring high-rise condominium towers in Long Beach, California violated 42 U.S.C. § 3604(f)(2)(A) and (f)(3)(B) by refusing to provide the complainant, who has paraplegia, a reserved accessible parking space for over three years. FirstService Residential California, LLC, Rebecca Hawkins, Christopher Harrington, and Aqua Maintenance Corp. are also named as defendants. On October 10, 2023, the court granted the United States’ motion for partial summary judgment on liability. The consent decree requires the defendants to adopt new reasonable accommodations and reasonable modifications policies, provide fair housing training to employees working at the approximately 950 properties managed by one of the defendants, and provide a properly marked, accessible parking space to the complainant for as long as she lives at the subject property. The case was referred to the Division after the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) received a complaint, conducted an investigation, and issued a charge of discrimination.
Kalway v. Calabria Ranch HOA, LLC
Arizona Supreme Court
Learn about the Arizona Supreme Court ruling in the case of Kalway vs. Calabria Ranch HOA. Munger • Denker • Ruiz • Barbour knows HOA law.
Columbia senior v. condo group
Richland County Court of Common Pleas (Columbia, SC)
Columbia senior wins $2.6M in injury case versus condo group
Marino v. Clary Lakes Homeowners Association, Inc.
Georgia Court of Appeals
The Georgia Court of Appeals reversed the trial court's grant of summary judgment to the Clary Lakes Homeowners Association, Inc. and its denial of summary judgment to Joseph and Patricia Marino regarding a restrictive covenant concerning vehicle parking and garage use for storage. The Appeals Court found the restrictive covenant unenforceable against the Marinos because neither written agreement by the Marinos nor approval by two-thirds of the Association members, as required by OCGA § 44-5-60 (d) (4) or OCGA § 44-3-226 (a) of the POA Act, was met. The case was remanded with direction for the trial court to enter summary judgment in favor of the Marinos on the Association's claims for damages and injunctive relief.
Gallery Condominium Association, Inc. v. Courtney Ellington
Georgia Court of Appeals
Courtney Ellington appeals the grant of summary judgment to Gallery Condominium Association, Inc. in its suit to recover unpaid condominium assessments. She argues that genuine issues of material fact exist and that the evidence does not support the association's award of attorney fees. We find that Ellington did not meet her burden of coming forward with evidence to create a genuine issue of material fact and that the evidence supports the attorney fees award. We thus affirm.
Thomas Hendrix v. Eagle Neck Homeowners' Association
Georgia Court of Appeals
Thomas Hendrix, a property owner in Eagle Neck subdivision, filed a petition for injunctive relief seeking to "restrain and enjoin" the Eagle Neck Homeowners' Association from violating certain restrictive covenants. Hendrix claimed the Association was violating Section 3.1 by allowing commercial use of the subdivision's private airstrip and also violating Section 2.15 by allowing homeowners to drill private wells on their lots. The trial court granted summary judgment to the Association on Hendrix's claim regarding the airstrip but denied summary judgment on his claim for well drilling violations. The Court of Appeals of Georgia affirmed the trial court's decision in both cases (A11A0621 and A11A0622).
The Landings Association, Inc. v. Williams et al.
Georgia Court of Appeals
In this action, the estate and heirs of Gwyneth Williams (collectively, "the appellees") seek to recover damages from the owners of a lagoon where Williams was allegedly killed by a large alligator. The State Court of Chatham County denied in part the motion for summary judgment filed by the joint owners of the lagoon, The Landings Association, Inc. ("the association") and The Landings Club, Inc. ("the club"). We granted the applications filed by the association and the club (collectively, "the owners") for an interlocutory appeal from that ruling. We have consolidated the association's appeal, Case No. A10A1955, and the club's appeal, Case No. A10A1956, for disposition. The owners contend that they are entitled to judgment as a matter of law under both premises liability and nuisance theories of recovery. In addition, the owners contend that, under the doctrine of animals ferae naturae, a landowner is not responsible for any harm caused by a free wild animal on the owner's land. For the reasons explained below, we affirm in part and reverse in part.
Newton's Crest Homeowners' Association v. Camp
Georgia Court of Appeals
Georgia Appeals Court Newton’s Crest Homeowners’ Association v. Camp 702 S.E.2d 41 (2010) NEWTON'S CREST HOMEOWNERS' ASSOCIATION v. CAMP, et al. Kennedy Development Company, Inc. v. Camp, et al. Nos. A10A1573, A10A1867. Court of Appeals of Georgia. September 24, 2010. Downey & Cleveland, Russell B. Davis, Marietta, Joshua S. Ruplin, for Newton's Crest Homeowners Association. Hicks, Casey & Foster, Richard C. Foster, Lisa K. Whitfield for Kennedy Development Company, Marietta, Carlock, Copeland & Stair, David F. Root, Cheryl H. Shaw, Atlanta for Oakridge Homes, LLC, Bryan, Cave, Powell & Goldstein, Katherine V. Hernacki, C. Scott Greene, Curtis J. Romig, Matthew G. Watson, for D.G Jenkins Development Corporation Atlanta, Larry E. Stewart, Lawrenceville, Gregg P. Counts, Suwanee, for the camps. ELLINGTON, Judge. Donald Camp, Brenda Camp and Donnie Camp (collectively, "the Camps") sued Kennedy Development Company, Inc. ("Kennedy") for negligence, nuisance and continuing trespass, alleging that Kennedy's development of a subdivision on nearby property and its alteration of an existing detention pond caused storm water runoff to flood and damage their property. Kennedy, in turn, filed a third-party complaint against the Newton's Crest Homeowners' Association, Inc. ("NCHA"), contending that, pursuant to a contract between the parties, the NCHA agreed to defend and indemnify Kennedy for any claims, actions or damages related to the construction, maintenance, repair or operation of the subdivision or the detention pond. The NCHA moved for summary judgment on Kennedy's third-party complaint and, in Case No. A10A1573, appeals the denial of its motion. In Case No. A10A1867, Kennedy filed a cross-appeal from the trial court's denial of its motion for summary judgment on the Camps' complaint. For the following reasons, we affirm the denial of summary judgment to Kennedy in Case No. A10A1867, and reverse the denial of summary judgment to the NCHA in Case No. A10A1573. In order to prevail on a motion for summary judgment under OCGA § 9-11-56, the moving party must show that there exists no genuine issue of material fact, and that the undisputed facts, viewed in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party, demand judgment as a matter of law. Moreover, on appeal from the denial or grant of summary judgment[,] the appellate court is to conduct a de novo review of the evidence to determine whether there exists a genuine issue of material fact, and whether the undisputed facts, viewed in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party, warrant judgment as a matter of law. (Citations omitted.) Benton v. Benton, 280 Ga. 468, 470, 629 S.E.2d 204 (2006). So viewed, the record shows the following facts. In 1967, Donald and Brenda Camp purchased about six acres of rural property in Gwinnett County. They purchased another six acres of adjacent property in the 1990s. Throughout this time, a natural creek ran through the Camps' property. On the north side of the Camps' property is the Hunter's Pond subdivision, which was developed in the 1970s around a lake that is now called "Hunter's Pond." Historically, excess stormwater from the pond drained into the creek on the Camps' property. Tycor, Inc. owned approximately 47 acres of undeveloped property northwest of (and uphill from) the Hunter's Pond subdivision, and the corporation planned to develop a new subdivision on the land. Pursuant to a February 2001 agreement between Tycor and the Hunter's Pond subdivision ("the detention facility agreement"), the new subdivision was going to be allowed to use Hunter's Pond as its detention pond. Under the detention facility agreement, Tycor agreed to repair the pond's "dam and outlet structure," to drain the pond and lower its floor, to maintain the pond in good working order, and to remove and dispose of "all future accumulated post-development sediments." Before beginning to clear or to develop the new subdivision property, however, Tycor sold the property to Kennedy in April 2001, and the corporation assigned its rights and responsibilities under the detention facility agreement to Kennedy. Kennedy immediately began developing the new subdivision community of approximately 185 homes, Newton's Crest, by, inter alia, clear-cutting the land, grading, installing utility lines, and putting in streets. In addition, Kennedy made Hunter's Pond deeper and put in a concrete spillway. According to Donald Camp, in 2001, when Kennedy began clearing the land for the Newton's Crest subdivision, the amount and velocity of storm water, silt and mud running onto his property and into his creek from Hunter's Pond each time it rained increased significantly, causing substantial erosion, tree loss, and other damage to his property and reducing its value. During his deposition, Camp repeatedly emphasized that he had lived on his property for over 30 years and that he "never had any problems" with excess storm water running
ONE BUCKHEAD LOOP CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC. v. PEW et al.
Georgia Court of Appeals
One Buckhead Loop Condominium Association, Inc. (the "Association") sued Stephen E. Pew as trustee of the GST Exemption Trust of Gladys W. Pew, Settlor (collectively, "Pew"), seeking judicial foreclosure of its lien against Pew's condominium unit and for damages arising under the Georgia Condominium Act. The trial court granted the Association's motion for summary judgment, awarding it assessments, interest, court costs, and attorney fees. On appeal, Pew contended that summary judgment was error because the trial court (i) awarded damages in excess of those originally pled and authorized the recovery of amounts barred by judicial estoppel, (ii) calculated its awards improperly, and (iii) abused its discretion in denying his motion to reopen discovery. The Court of Appeals of Georgia affirmed the trial court's decision.
Lore v. Suwanee Creek Homeowners Association, Inc.
Georgia Court of Appeals
Rebecca A. Lore and David Alan Lore filed suit against their homeowners association, the Suwanee Creek Homeowners Association, Inc. ("SCHOA"), alleging claims for nuisance, trespass, and negligence based on water runoff from a SCHOA-owned "Recreation Area" immediately behind their property. The Lores also asserted a personal injury claim based on injuries Rebecca Lore sustained when the ground upon which she was standing collapsed, attributing the collapse to the repeated flooding and storm-water-runoff washing away the earth under what appeared to be solid ground surface. SCHOA moved for summary judgment on all claims. The trial court granted summary judgment as to the Lores' personal injury claims and denied summary judgment as to the remaining claims. The Lores appeal the grant of summary judgment in Case No. A10A0012, and SCHOA appeals the denial of summary judgment in Case No. A10A0013. For reasons that follow, we reverse in both cases.
Jones v. Forest Lake Village Homeowners Association, Inc.
Georgia Court of Appeals
This is a class action in which homeowners in the Forest Lake Village subdivision sued Andrew R. Jones, the owner of a private, well-based water system that has served the subdivision since its development in 1973. A jury found in favor of the class and, based on that verdict, the trial court entered an order declaring that the subdivision's restrictive covenants did not require the homeowners to remain connected to Jones's private water system; permanently enjoining Jones from billing the class members and/or attempting to collect from them a monthly connection fee; and awarding the Forest Lake Village Homeowners Association $7,500 in attorney fees. Jones appealed from the denial of his motion for a new trial or, in the alternative, a judgment notwithstanding the verdict ("j.n.o.v."). The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's order denying Jones's motion for a new trial or j.n.o.v. However, the final order of judgment failed to comply with OCGA § 9-11-23(c)(3)'s requirement that it contain a description of those individuals included in the class. Accordingly, the order of judgment was vacated and the case remanded for entry of an order that contains a description of the class members.
Barbara Bailey v. Stonecrest Condominium Association, Inc. et al.
Georgia Court of Appeals
Georgia Appeals Court Bailey v. Stonecrest Condominium Association 696 S.E.2d 462 (2010) BAILEY v. STONECREST CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC. et al. No. A10A0579. Court of Appeals of Georgia. June 18, 2010. Jeffrey R. Nickerson, Atlanta, Patrick N. Arndt, for Appellant. Hawkins, Parnell, Thackston & Young, Peter R. York, Atlanta, Leslie K. Brock, for Appellees. BLACKBURN, Judge. Barbara Bailey sued Stonecrest Condominium Association, Inc., the members of the Association's Board of Directors (Lagrit Morris, John Monteith, Leona McMichael, Harold Brown, and Brenda Clarkson), and the Association's management company (Today American Management, Inc.) (collectively "defendants"), claiming that amendments to the Association's Bylaws that prohibited leasing constituted racial discrimination in violation of OCGA §§ 8-3-202(a) and 8-3-222 of the Georgia Fair Housing Act and that the Board breached its fiduciary duties in proposing those amendments. Following the trial court's grant of summary judgment in favor of defendants as to all of Bailey's claims, she appeals, arguing that questions of material fact remain as to whether defendants' actions constituted racial discrimination, whether the Board breached its fiduciary duties, and whether she is entitled to recover punitive damages and attorney fees. For the reasons set forth below, we find that genuine issues of material fact exist as to whether the defendants passed the amendments with a discriminatory intent and therefore vacate the grant of summary judgment and remand the case for further action consistent with this opinion.