tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-341307882024-03-12T17:03:03.781-07:00utahcondolawUtahcondolaw is your source for up-to-date information on the development, governance and management of Community Associations, including condominiums, homeowners' associations and mixed use projects.Lincoln W. Hobbs, Esq., CCALhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12994231030469325010noreply@blogger.comBlogger183125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34130788.post-69112791220264321742010-05-12T20:27:00.000-07:002010-05-12T20:27:54.249-07:00We're MovingOver the next little while, I intend to relocate the hosting of this blog to wordpress -- it will allow more options and features in posting, and I think I can make it look a bit better. So, if you want to keep up, you might want to change your favorites and resubscribe at <a href="http://utahcondolaw.wordpress.com/">utahcondolaw.wordpress.com</a>Lincoln W. Hobbs, Esq., CCALhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12994231030469325010noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34130788.post-84980799407403379602010-03-26T17:02:00.000-07:002010-03-26T17:02:05.551-07:00Amending CC & Rs and Bylaws -- National and Local PresentationsThe <a href="http://www.nbi-sems.com/">National Business Institute</a> has asked me to present a national teleconference on the subject of amending community association (HOAs, Homeowner Associations, Home Owner Associations, condominiums, PUDs, Planned Unit Developments -- whatever you want to call them) governing documents.<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.nbi-sems.com/SemTeleDetails.aspx/Amending-CC-Rs-and-Bylaws/Teleconference/R-52975ER|?NavigationDataSource1=Rpp:25,Nrc:id-3-dyncount-500-dynorder-dynamic,Nra:pEventDate%2bpEventStartTime%2bStates%2bCredits%2bScope+of+Content%2bpLocationCity%2bpDescription%2bpProductId%2bpProductDescription%2bProductCode+(HIDDEN)%2bpAdditionalFormats,N:4294966983-304">The course</a> will be held on May 17, 2010; I'm going to be looking into whether NBI will let me have a few guests in our training center, so that I'm not talking into a telephone. I'm also looking into the possibility of a video recording for future access. <br />
<br />
Meanwhile, over the next several days I will be working on the course materials, so if there are any <i>sample materials </i>that you want me to include, let me know and I'll try to include some.Lincoln W. Hobbs, Esq., CCALhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12994231030469325010noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34130788.post-37655777414582615802010-03-25T10:29:00.000-07:002010-03-25T10:36:38.604-07:00The Essentials of Community Management<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiwbJEWRnVR1-ph1tl-l9ctZcV7rJBLlKX8ZZEtUTQU5Kx7Wn-J5ZSedRJh7Ns72bGpsv0-FmOh9OWafXENAeoO_QPOU5yPWMd7sg3nTT3JcOJIQ11Zz6Ua8qyba6UVoNmbuTjs9g/s1600/DSC_0146.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="214" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiwbJEWRnVR1-ph1tl-l9ctZcV7rJBLlKX8ZZEtUTQU5Kx7Wn-J5ZSedRJh7Ns72bGpsv0-FmOh9OWafXENAeoO_QPOU5yPWMd7sg3nTT3JcOJIQ11Zz6Ua8qyba6UVoNmbuTjs9g/s320/DSC_0146.JPG" width="320" /></a><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg9iTSWLbFQLDihTcBW_HsUseo5EbryqgyOChXVn5-JUk5fpJZrJ6cWeRbRTSQXir07oUEy2ugIKFOBzNFa9_dzIO1WicaZs7Hkh_Twk4dTBc9-jK2Wu6Krvyl9l35KyORwJTKuSw/s1600/DSC_0157.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg9iTSWLbFQLDihTcBW_HsUseo5EbryqgyOChXVn5-JUk5fpJZrJ6cWeRbRTSQXir07oUEy2ugIKFOBzNFa9_dzIO1WicaZs7Hkh_Twk4dTBc9-jK2Wu6Krvyl9l35KyORwJTKuSw/s320/DSC_0157.JPG" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjzWFGzYhG5Y34Ti03V8Y-Tbry51qTTFZ8lvbY-5ngB8zCttJWWO_mQCF3Mo3FrN8S9ItbHwVMcnE97PrE9mzIkcsHZx27mBJxjHG-oAlDCd4oWPu5yUr7VNuDBjqLzxXvxLjh7uA/s1600/DSC_0150.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="214" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjzWFGzYhG5Y34Ti03V8Y-Tbry51qTTFZ8lvbY-5ngB8zCttJWWO_mQCF3Mo3FrN8S9ItbHwVMcnE97PrE9mzIkcsHZx27mBJxjHG-oAlDCd4oWPu5yUr7VNuDBjqLzxXvxLjh7uA/s320/DSC_0150.JPG" width="320" /></a></div><div style="text-align: center;"><br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiF7vygEv-4PsAGIhmoZ21DKQK2-xBQ69SKO_u4kLp4-3lj47FpiTfazf2ij_RGYXjFNHhoxsNsMACyFQU4Jd_4rbldh593Oto7N2nDN-b4clUezeuhIpJafXcEvSMS9i-uianJlg/s1600/DSC_0140.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiF7vygEv-4PsAGIhmoZ21DKQK2-xBQ69SKO_u4kLp4-3lj47FpiTfazf2ij_RGYXjFNHhoxsNsMACyFQU4Jd_4rbldh593Oto7N2nDN-b4clUezeuhIpJafXcEvSMS9i-uianJlg/s320/DSC_0140.jpg" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhzPdZ-5nc5C_E26tOE5mm8bbh9kjgA1ZZo4NGBAI9_jLghz9Fnxua2CfJweuuuFcfGu-IZ7CmWgjVlOB8mVdwXCYZF0UGmSi5LeYLxil5ZLeKFjsT0oI6AVuL8IaxESCYFZOPW0Q/s1600/DSC_0148.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhzPdZ-5nc5C_E26tOE5mm8bbh9kjgA1ZZo4NGBAI9_jLghz9Fnxua2CfJweuuuFcfGu-IZ7CmWgjVlOB8mVdwXCYZF0UGmSi5LeYLxil5ZLeKFjsT0oI6AVuL8IaxESCYFZOPW0Q/s320/DSC_0148.jpg" /></a></div><br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjeps4-W9J_Haky12QNsZEcsY5QNrw1iDgkdgHcS1nIlp55Y_JQI0TdQAKOFbUKHBWdjjOHjhYYWxzI9biK-03rxMqjrGHjOieOoeJjCcLQjLdErUiIX-TxWhrE24V0YdtCGx7tdg/s1600/DSC_0152.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjeps4-W9J_Haky12QNsZEcsY5QNrw1iDgkdgHcS1nIlp55Y_JQI0TdQAKOFbUKHBWdjjOHjhYYWxzI9biK-03rxMqjrGHjOieOoeJjCcLQjLdErUiIX-TxWhrE24V0YdtCGx7tdg/s320/DSC_0152.JPG" /></a></div><br />
Last weekend, <a href="http://www.uccai.com/">The Utah Chapter of the Community Associations Institute</a> sponsored its "Essentials of Community Management" course. Several active members of the industry taught about the fundamentals of homeowner association and condominium management. Here are some pictures of some of the presenters. (Not pictured: Derek Petersen).</div><br />
Thanks to Beat Koszinowski and the Buckner Group for hosting us.Lincoln W. Hobbs, Esq., CCALhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12994231030469325010noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34130788.post-56549543670082303752010-03-07T18:36:00.000-08:002010-03-07T18:38:09.939-08:00Wasatch County v. Okelberry, Round 2 of __?You may recall <a href="http://utahcondolaw.blogspot.com/2008/03/keeping-your-private-roads-private.html">this post</a> from two years ago, where I reported on a trilogy of cases which dealt with the public dedication of private roadways; in the opinions, the Utah Supreme Court held that "An overt act that is intended by a property owner to interrupt the use of a road as a public thoroughfare, and is reasonably calculated to do so, constitutes an interruption sufficient to restart the required ten-year period under the Dedication Statute."<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiAfswlkVIhP7fpgZqZl5Nq7yuo4IyuMikeGxbShVOuw5_hSrLF0NDJ5TpAgWkBK8gDL_1j4BtbdYjugcHk7hmrzryGItm2BN3grq4m1amzH6HqRSi-mhyrMsfMKkgmDLV7WVc6KA/s1600-h/lock.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiAfswlkVIhP7fpgZqZl5Nq7yuo4IyuMikeGxbShVOuw5_hSrLF0NDJ5TpAgWkBK8gDL_1j4BtbdYjugcHk7hmrzryGItm2BN3grq4m1amzH6HqRSi-mhyrMsfMKkgmDLV7WVc6KA/s400/lock.jpg" width="264" /></a></div>The Okelberrys and Wasatch County were the parties to one of those three cases, and when the Supreme Court issued its opinion, it sent them back to the trial court for further proceedings, in light of its clarification. The Okelberrys sought a new hearing or trial to present evidence on their intent; the trial court denied that request and reviewed prior pleadings, new memoranda and heard new arguments. The trial court found that there were gates on the roads, and that the gates were intermittently locked. The court stated that Ray Okelberry had testified that he locked the gates but "he did not testify that he intended to keep the public from accessing the roads at this time.<br />
<br />
<br />
The appellate court reviewed this history, and ultimately sent the case back, once again, to the trial court to "give the parties an opportunity to present evidence related to the Okelberrys' intent to interrupt public use and identify with more specificity whether and when the gates were closed and locked and the intent of those actions."<br />
<br />
I think we can anticipate another appeal in a couple of years, at which time the court will review the credibility of Okelberrys' almost certain testimony that the locks were indeed put there to stop people, (rather than exceptionally intelligent Wasatch County livestock with opposable hooves), and Wasatch County's contention that that testimony is not credible. Hopefully, when presented with that evidence, the appellate courts will allow this case to be finally resolved.Lincoln W. Hobbs, Esq., CCALhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12994231030469325010noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34130788.post-67262497235158654242010-03-07T17:24:00.000-08:002010-03-07T17:24:31.261-08:00South Ridge HOA v. Brown -- What's a "Short-Term" Rental?In an opinion issued about a month ago, the Utah Court of Appeals decided that "a weekly rental is clearly similar to nightly rentals and timeshares, when considering those terms together."<br />
<br />
The case arose from language contained in the South Ridge Homeowners' Association's Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (C, C & Rs) that provided, in relevant part, "No timeshare, nightly rental or similar use will be allowed on any single family lot." The court thus considered its task to be to determine "whether Brown's weekly rentals were uses similar to a nightly rental or timeshare." The court concluded that "a weekly rental is clearly similar to nightly rentals and timeshares, when considering those terms together." In coming to this conclusion, the court focused on the fact that the "common thread" of these short duration rentals is that "people will be coming and going for short periods of time."<br />
<br />
The court ultimately ruled in favor of the association, and surprisingly affirmed the lower court's broad injunction, despite the fact that the court found "the breadth of the trial court's injunction more troubling..." Under the injunction, Ms. Brown was to notify the association of the identity of her visitors and the duration of their visits. The association's counsel argued that the requirement of notification was only to apply to those guests who were not accompanied by Ms. Brown, but that was not in the order. The dissent agreed with the majority's interpretation of the C, C & Rs, but would have limited the injunction to prospectively prohibit the disputed short-term rentals, without a requirement of advance disclosure of occupancies.<br />
<br />
I'm not certain whether I disagree with the court's ultimate conclusion in this case, although I'm a bit disappointed as to how they got there. First of all, in order to interpret the contract as a matter of law, they had to find the contract to be unambiguous. I'm troubled that they quickly disregarded the provisions which allowed an owner to "rent or lease said owner's residential building from time to time." Brown's counsel asserted, and it was apparently not challenged, that the rentals happened "occasionally" and "fewer than six" times a year. Thus it appears uncontested that the frequency of the rentals was not in violation of the covenants, leaving only their duration of possible violation. In that regard, the court relied upon the "timeshare" language to expand the prohibition of "nightly" rentals.<br />
<br />
What the court appears to have disregarded is that a "timeshare" is a particular type of ownership, and not directly related to rental periods, or even really related to a rental of a unit by its owner. Timeshares are specifically defined and regulated by an entire chapter of the Utah Code, (Utah Code Ann 57-19), and that a timeshare unit is intended primarily to be owned among a wide variety (presumably 52) groups of owners, whereas Ms. Brown's rentals were occurring at about 10% of that frequency. I think it's a stretch, at best, to conclude "as a matter of law," that the uses are similar. The conflict between the "time to time" language and the "nightly" prohibition seems to have created an ambiguity which, under traditional jurisprudential rules, must be determined by a jury. See, e.g. <i>Rubey v. Wood</i>, 15 Utah 2d 312 (1964). Lincoln W. Hobbs, Esq., CCALhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12994231030469325010noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34130788.post-84851260809724391392010-03-07T16:03:00.000-08:002010-03-07T16:06:00.828-08:00News on Reverse ForeclosuresMy Twitterpal Melissa Garcia, (@ColoradoHOAGal) pointed me to <a href="http://www.miamiherald.com/2010/03/07/1516871/desperate-condo-homeowner-groups.html">this article in the Miami Herald</a>, which explains the mechanics of a typical reverse foreclosure. Reverse foreclosures are being pursued by community associations throughout the country, as associations find themselves stuck with units on which the owners will not pay and on which the lenders will not foreclose. The problem arises everywhere, but particularly in those states with higher foreclosure rates.<br />
<div><br />
</div><div>A condominium or homeowners association (HOA) that forecloses a unit upon which there is a senior lien will not be able to take title, but will be able to get access to the unit, and presumably put some pressure on the lender to step up to its obligations. The law is still developing in this area, so watch for new developments as some cases are decided.<br />
<div><br />
</div><div>The article also quotes another frequent blogger and twitterer, Donna Berger, (@CondoandHOALaw); Donna wisely recommends that associations rent the units after taking them from the banks.</div></div>Lincoln W. Hobbs, Esq., CCALhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12994231030469325010noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34130788.post-61378088967746777432010-03-03T19:49:00.000-08:002010-03-03T19:49:20.726-08:00The Essentials of Community ManagementI'm in Natick, MA., preparing to teach the <a href="http://www.caionline.org/">CAI</a> course on <a href="http://www.caionline.org/events/managers/pmdp/Pages/M100.aspx">The Essentials of Community Association Management</a> tomorrow and Friday. I don't teach this course as often as some others, but every time that I do teach it, I am impressed as to what a good overview of the industry that it provides. I've taught board members, attorneys and many managers in the course, and I think it provides knowledge at all levels. If you haven't taken the course, you should consider it. It is also available as a home-study course, if you're not inclined to take the time to learn from one of CAI's distinguished national faculty members.Lincoln W. Hobbs, Esq., CCALhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12994231030469325010noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34130788.post-18331562512618159242010-03-01T20:54:00.000-08:002010-03-01T20:54:16.579-08:00Truth in Advertising of "Utah HOA Attorneys".There's a new website out there that purports to be a listing of HOA attorneys in Utah. There's one firm listed on the site, and the listed lawyer (who won't be identified) is identified as a "thoroughly [sic] attorney." Since I'd never seen the site before, I thought I'd give it the benefit of the doubt, and suggest Hobbs & Olson for a listing, but I clearly indicated in my email that I was not interested in paying for a listing. 5 minutes later, after 9 p.m., I received a response which stated: "we are a paid only service, we do not give space away for free..."<br />
<br />
So, if you want to find a "thoroughly [sic] attorney," who is paying to be the listed HOA attorney, you might want to find that other site by Googling it. I'm not going to list it here, because that would be assisting that site's credibility, and I don't think that a website that purports to list "the best hoa attornies [sic] in Utah," but that is a "paid only service" deserves any credibility.Lincoln W. Hobbs, Esq., CCALhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12994231030469325010noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34130788.post-39081469119681330402010-02-09T20:17:00.000-08:002010-02-09T20:17:47.661-08:00Stacking Up<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEghP-hMOp0l_cUwSQ5B7z_8GxxQk7JkSmgQiiSe6SqAS8H2su2ufm5tFTU35X6bVP4uBdD46XI1hcjhUulWH09xMGwypEGwY0Es7qA9dys91_hkKJbEQDY9sdaAbRB4cmM-JJWVtQ/s1600-h/City+Creek.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="210" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEghP-hMOp0l_cUwSQ5B7z_8GxxQk7JkSmgQiiSe6SqAS8H2su2ufm5tFTU35X6bVP4uBdD46XI1hcjhUulWH09xMGwypEGwY0Es7qA9dys91_hkKJbEQDY9sdaAbRB4cmM-JJWVtQ/s400/City+Creek.jpg" width="400" /></a></div><br />
There's been lots of community association news in Utah over the past several weeks, and not a lot of time to write about it. The Utah appellate courts have handed down several cases dealing directly with community associations and homeowners, and several other cases with tangential, but significant impacts on the industry. I'll blog about those in the next several days.<br />
<br />
The other news deals, rather surprisingly, with progress in various community association projects. First, a new project in the Sugarhouse area is opening soon; the controversial <a href="http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_14349331">Urbana on Eleventh</a> "condominium tower" will have 29 "pet-friendly" units. Neighbors fear parking and crime issues, but many local businesses are hoping for increased commerce. Units will range from slightly under 200k and up to slightly over 500k.<a href="http://www.blogger.com/"></a><br />
<br />
Meanwhile, progress on the City Creek project is continuing, with a good portion of the food court having its grand opening today. That event gave rise to some new publicity and a status update on all of the buildings, nicely shown on this <a href="http://media.bonnint.net/slc/1770/177057/17705795.pdf">diagram.</a> Units in the <a href="http://www.citycreekliving.com/rc/">Richards Court</a> condominiums will commence in just a few months, with units in the taller <a href="http://www.citycreekliving.com/regent/">Regent</a> and <a href="http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=156514">City Creek Tower 1</a> project being available in mid-2011. (Interestingly, the developer has little available information on the "Tower 1;" the provided link is to a skyscraper page. That page is worth a look, since it has some photographic history of the construction, and nerdy photos, rendering and videos.<br />
<br />
And lastly, the City Creek Project has gotten some <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/08/us/08saltlake.html">more publicity from the New York Times</a>, which has an interesting outsiders take on the church/state and economic issues associated with the development. One interesting tidbit in the NY Times article notes that although the church will likely allow alcohol in some of the development, they will sell the underlying property to accommodate that while<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 22px;"> "keep[ing] the church from being in the liquor business or from benefiting from liquor sales." </span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Times, serif;">(Regular readers of this blog will recall that the New York Times has <a href="http://utahcondolaw.blogspot.com/2009/05/city-creek-in-new-york-times.html">written on the City Creek project in the past.</a></span>Lincoln W. Hobbs, Esq., CCALhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12994231030469325010noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34130788.post-40442930701470726042010-01-28T08:20:00.000-08:002010-01-28T08:20:31.809-08:00Utah Condo Sales Are Up -- Way Up!The Salt Lake Board of Realtors issued its fourth quarter 2009 Housing Market Report, and it appears that the Utah housing market, and particularly the condominium market may be on the mend.<br />
<br />
Single family sales were up 36 percent compared to the same quarter of the previous year; condominium sales were up even more. 544 condominiums sold during the quarter in Salt Lake County, which was a 42 percent increase over the corresponding 2009 quarter. <br />
<br />
The year-end figures for 2009 were also up over the numbers for 2008. 2008 was the third year of a three year downturn in sales, thus suggesting that 2008 may have been the bottom.<br />
<br />
Here's a link to the Salt Lake Board of Realtors' <a href="http://www.slrealtors.com/stats/press/">press release</a> and here's a link to a <a href="http://www.slrealtors.com/stats/">spreadsheet of the statistics.</a>Lincoln W. Hobbs, Esq., CCALhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12994231030469325010noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34130788.post-73855059156923222692010-01-25T06:09:00.000-08:002010-01-25T06:09:10.968-08:00That's a Pretty Big Loan...The New York Times is reporting today about a rather <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/25/nyregion/25stuy.html">major default</a>; the debtors defaulted on $3 billion worth of notes last week. The 5.4 billion dollar deal which defaulted had involved <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 22px;">110 buildings and 11,227 apartments in what was the most expensive real estate deal of its kind in American history.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Georgia, serif; font-size: medium;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 15px; line-height: 22px;"><br />
</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Georgia, serif; font-size: medium;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 15px; line-height: 22px;">Wonder if anyone will try to step in and convert the to condominiums or cooperatives? Hah!</span></span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 22px;"><br />
</span>Lincoln W. Hobbs, Esq., CCALhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12994231030469325010noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34130788.post-57499632886824675642010-01-23T15:48:00.000-08:002010-01-23T15:49:01.122-08:00CCAL Law Conference -- Financing Availability<div class="MsoNormal">Over the past several years, many changes have taken place in real estate financing; one of the less publicized areas of change deals with the availability of financing for community associations. Lenders and underwriters are changing the way they review and approve those associations that can get federal mortgages.<br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">The panelists for today’s town hall meeting on mortgage financing eligibility include DeLynn Conley, Senior Risk Manager, Project Standards, Fannie Mae; Loura K. Sanchez, Esq., CCAL, Stephen M. Marcus, Esq., CCAL; and George E. Nowack, Esq., CCAL.<br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">FHA Loans<o:p></o:p></b><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">FHA loans are now 30% of the market. On February 1, spot loans will no longer exist. Previously, questionnaires would be distributed, and largely ignored. However, starting on February 1, associations will need to be approved, and those approvals will be expensive to obtain.<br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">There are 3 mortgagee letters that have been issued. Mortgagee letter 46b provides two methods for approval; currently, all applications are being sought through the FHA.<br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">There are many documentary requirements on applying for certification. An attorney’s opinion is not required by FHA, but is left to the lender or developer. The developer or lender may, in turn require a letter. That opinion will require, in theory, that an association complies with “all applicable laws and regulations…” <br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">Rights of first refusal will be allowed, if not discriminatory.<br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">FHA may have an advantage with respect to pre-sale requirements; in connection with FHA, it will be at 30% through the end of 2010.<br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">FHA used to limit its involvement in a project to 10%; that will be increased to 50% through 2010. Thereafter, it will decrease to 30%.<br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">FHA appears to have removed legal document requirements, other than a transition limitation.<br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">FHA will be reviewing budgets, and an inclusion of deductible funding for insurance deductibles.<br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">FNMA<o:p></o:p></b><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">FMAC will follow FNMA and FMAC requirements; FNMA will require 10% reserve funding and deductible coverages for insurance.<br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">Insurance Requirements<o:p></o:p></b><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">FNMA requirements now require insurance to cover 100% replacement cost, including replacement of the Units. This can be a guaranteed replacement cost policy, or a policy with a replacement cost policy with an agreed value endorsement to cover any coinsurance gap.<br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">Under the new rules, a borrower becomes involved in connection with betterments and improvements. If the association policy doesn’t cover betterments and improvements, there will be a gap.<br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">Bare Walls – the association’s policy will cover only replacement of the drywall or plaster, and none of the fixtures or improvements.<br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">Single Entity – the most typical coverage, according to Nowack.<br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">All-In -- the association’s policy will cover and replace all contents of the unit, including the improvements and betterments.<br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">If the association does not cover with all-in coverage, the owner must obtain a “walls in” policy. (Which would be a standard HO-6 policy.) The policy must cover, at a minimum, 20% of the appraised value of the Unit. A major problem with this, of course, is that the value of a Unit may well include intangibles such as a view.<br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">Another new insurance requirement is fidelity coverage; the association needs to have a minimum of three months of aggregate assessments, and an amount equal to all of the association’s reserves.<br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">What Next?<o:p></o:p></b><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">Steven Marcus is suggesting that associations be proactive prior to February 1 to obtain certifications; Project Approvals out of Philadelphia is one possible source.<br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">Associations involved in litigation, and associations with special assessments in place, will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis.<br />
</div>Lincoln W. Hobbs, Esq., CCALhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12994231030469325010noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34130788.post-80769822461736920182010-01-23T15:42:00.000-08:002010-01-23T15:42:07.590-08:00CCAL Law Conference -- The Unauthorized Practice of Law<!--StartFragment--> <br />
<div class="MsoNormal">Yesterday afternoon, I attended a session on the unauthorized practice of law in community associations, with an emphasis on managers’ conduct.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The hypotheticals were fairly predictable; sales contracts by realtors, interpretation of governing documents and the biggie – managers preparing and filing liens.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Richard Ekimoto pointed out that the unauthorized practice of law constitutes a civil and criminal offense in all 50 states.<br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">Now, the focus has shifted to the aiding and abetting of the unauthorized practice of law – the first question, does an attorney aid and abet by preparing a “standard form” for managers’ use?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This isn’t an issue for me, in light of my declination of representation of management companies, but I have no doubt that my forms are being used as “forms” (and modified) by managers and associations alike.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">Richard Ekimoto is telling about having been informed that a management company that he once worked with who admitted to having had a binder full of opinion letters from his firm and others, for review and use by managers within the office.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Needless to say, there are some real problems with that, the least of which is the obvious breach of the attorney/client privilege associated with that conduct.<br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">The audience is suggesting there’s a trend for managers to get more aggressive in their marketing of legal services.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>An Arizona manager who apparently asked a question at last year’s seminar is posting materials suggesting that he “spoke at the College of Community Association Lawyer’s seminar.”<br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">Now there’s a backlash from managers who assert that they’re constantly put into an untenable position of being asked to answer legal questions, but told not to call counsel for the answers.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Fortunately, the moderator brought that discussion to a halt before you (and others) heard about it (and the ensuing brawl) on the evening news…<br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">A couple of other points quickly presented as the seminar draws to a close:<br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoListParagraph" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -.25in;"><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">·<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span></span>The presence of counsel at a meeting will, if appropriately handled, allow for the protection of candid discussions under the cloak of the attorney-client privilege.<br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoListParagraph" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -.25in;"><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">·<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span></span>An association board that relies upon the advice of an appropriate professional will be protected by the business judgment rule, regardless of the wisdom or advisability of the ultimate decision.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The business judgment rule focuses on the procedure associated with decision making rather than the substance of the decision. <br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><!--EndFragment-->Lincoln W. Hobbs, Esq., CCALhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12994231030469325010noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34130788.post-37445909463908608402010-01-23T15:39:00.000-08:002010-01-23T15:39:04.213-08:00CCAL Seminar -- Collecting Assessments<!--StartFragment--> <br />
<div class="MsoNormal">Terry A. Kessler, Esq.; Michael S. Karpoff, Esq. and David C. Swedelson, Esq. are the speakers for this session.<br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">A topic being addressed for the third time in this session is assessment recovery; once again, attorneys here are stating that they’re seeing clients take their collections to other firms and other resources (such as collection agencies).<br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">Needless to say, everyone is reminiscing about the good old days, when less than 1% of the matters were going to sale; now it’s probably 20%.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In California, they’re starting to see some of the units get picked up at the sale.<br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">Terry Kessler is an advocate of judicial foreclosure from New Jersey.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Judicial foreclosures were taking 6 to 9 months; now it’s taking from 8 to 12 months, and sometimes up to two years, to finish the judicial process.<br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">Ms. Kessler also advocates the pursuit of rent from tenants where possible, even where the lender is foreclosing its lien.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In Utah, specific statutory provisions facilitate the association’s ability to demand rent from tenants.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Hence if your association has rental units, the occupancy of a unit should be considered as an aspect of the collection plan.<br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><!--EndFragment-->Lincoln W. Hobbs, Esq., CCALhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12994231030469325010noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34130788.post-62307761469597108192010-01-23T13:54:00.000-08:002010-01-23T13:55:35.080-08:00CCAL Seminar -- Insurance Audit<span style="font-family: 'Lucida Grande'; font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: 11px;"> </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: 'Lucida Grande'; font-size: small;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: 'Lucida Grande'; font-size: small;"><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br />
</span><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Joel W. Meskin, Esq., CIRMS presented a session today on auditing associations’ policies.</span><span style="font-family: inherit;"> </span><span style="font-family: inherit;">In actuality, the discussion related more to a review of policies, but he covered many good points in the allotted hour.</span><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br />
</span><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Joel’s hypothetical began with a failure to provide timely notice of a potential claim and a resultant declination of reimbursement for initial defense case.</span><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br />
</span><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Joel reminded in a session yesterday, and again in his session today that associations should NOT distribute a list of delinquent unit owners.</span><span style="font-family: inherit;"> </span><span style="font-family: inherit;">He frequently sees claims arising from those lists.</span><span style="font-family: inherit;"> </span><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br />
</span><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Joel recommends that all associations have reserve studies, and asserts that these reserve studies may be one of the most important risk management tools to an association.</span><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br />
</span><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Joel notes the difference between imbedded D & O policies and stand-alone policies.</span><span style="font-family: inherit;"> </span><span style="font-family: inherit;">Several companies provide D & O coverage as an automatic endorsement; the imbedded policies generally, if not always, provide lesser coverages.</span><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br />
</span><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Many, if not most Directors and Officers (D & O) claims are not monetary claims; the imbedded coverages may exclude many of these types of claims.</span><span style="font-family: inherit;"> </span><span style="font-family: inherit;">Imbedded policies also limit the class of those included within the category of insureds.</span><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br />
</span><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Respecting fidelity bond coverages, Joel is recommending the greater of:</span><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br />
</span><br />
</div><div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -.25in;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">1.</span><span style="font: normal normal normal 7pt/normal 'Times New Roman';"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"> </span></span></span><span style="font-family: inherit;">the maximum funds that will be in the custody of the association or its management agent at any time the bond is in force;</span><br />
</div><div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -.25in;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">2.</span><span style="font: normal normal normal 7pt/normal 'Times New Roman';"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"> </span></span></span><span style="font-family: inherit;">any amount required by the association’s bylaws;</span><br />
</div><div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -.25in;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">3.</span><span style="font: normal normal normal 7pt/normal 'Times New Roman';"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"> </span></span></span><span style="font-family: inherit;">any amount required by statute; or</span><br />
</div><div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -.25in;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">4.</span><span style="font: normal normal normal 7pt/normal 'Times New Roman';"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"> </span></span></span><span style="font-family: inherit;">three months of assessments/fees plus current reserve funds as required by the lenders.</span><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br />
</span><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Crime coverage is a separate coverage from fidelity coverage, and covers theft and related losses resulting from acts of third parties.</span><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br />
</span><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Attorneys often represent their clients without giving notice to the carrier, and then the policy period passes.</span><span style="font-family: inherit;"> </span><span style="font-family: inherit;">That will result in the loss of coverage.</span><br />
</div></span>Lincoln W. Hobbs, Esq., CCALhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12994231030469325010noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34130788.post-57255521263389080192010-01-23T10:30:00.000-08:002010-01-23T10:30:16.904-08:00CCAL Seminar -- The Case Law Update<!--StartFragment--> <br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; tab-stops: 28.0pt 56.0pt 84.0pt 112.0pt 140.0pt 168.0pt 196.0pt 224.0pt 3.5in 280.0pt 308.0pt 336.0pt; text-autospace: none;"><span style="color: black; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">One of the many highlights, and always the best-attended events of the CCAL Law Conference, are the two morning sessions of the Case Law Update, which has been presented for the past several years by the team of Wilbert Washington II, Esq., CCAL and George E. Nowack, Jr., Esq., CCAL.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Their always interesting and humerous presentation is based upon a compilation of leading cases of the preceding year; the cases are compiled and summarized by Donald Dyekman, Esq., CCAL.<o:p></o:p></span><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; tab-stops: 28.0pt 56.0pt 84.0pt 112.0pt 140.0pt 168.0pt 196.0pt 224.0pt 3.5in 280.0pt 308.0pt 336.0pt; text-autospace: none;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; tab-stops: 28.0pt 56.0pt 84.0pt 112.0pt 140.0pt 168.0pt 196.0pt 224.0pt 3.5in 280.0pt 308.0pt 336.0pt; text-autospace: none;"><span style="color: black; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">Here’s my summary of their commentary on the cases; if and when I get Don’s permission, I’ll add a link to his compilation, which includes even more cases, and some slightly different commentary.<o:p></o:p></span><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; tab-stops: 28.0pt 56.0pt 84.0pt 112.0pt 140.0pt 168.0pt 196.0pt 224.0pt 3.5in 280.0pt 308.0pt 336.0pt; text-autospace: none;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; tab-stops: 28.0pt 56.0pt 84.0pt 112.0pt 140.0pt 168.0pt 196.0pt 224.0pt 3.5in 280.0pt 308.0pt 336.0pt; text-autospace: none;"><b><i><span style="color: black; font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri;">Amendment of Covenants and Bylaws<o:p></o:p></span></i></b><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; tab-stops: 28.0pt 56.0pt 84.0pt 112.0pt 140.0pt 168.0pt 196.0pt 224.0pt 3.5in 280.0pt 308.0pt 336.0pt; text-autospace: none;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; tab-stops: 28.0pt 56.0pt 84.0pt 112.0pt 140.0pt 168.0pt 196.0pt 224.0pt 3.5in 280.0pt 308.0pt 336.0pt; text-autospace: none;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="color: black; font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman";">Apple Valley Gardens Association, Inc. v. MacHutta,</span></i><span style="color: black; font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman";"> 763 N.W. 2d 126 (Wisc., 2009) </span>involved a lease restriction adopted through an association’s bylaws; the court upheld the amendment.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The bylaw amendment had not been recorded.<span style="color: black; font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman";">. <o:p></o:p></span><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; tab-stops: 28.0pt 56.0pt 84.0pt 112.0pt 140.0pt 168.0pt 196.0pt 224.0pt 3.5in 280.0pt 308.0pt 336.0pt; text-autospace: none;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; tab-stops: 28.0pt 56.0pt 84.0pt 112.0pt 140.0pt 168.0pt 196.0pt 224.0pt 3.5in 280.0pt 308.0pt 336.0pt; text-autospace: none;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="color: black; font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman";">Riverview Heights Homeowners’ Association & Riverview Heights Homeowners, Inc., v. Rislov</span></i><span style="color: black; font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman";">, 205 P.3d 1035 (Wyo., 2009) </span>involved a challenge to an amendment that had purportedly been adopted, but had not been memorialized as required – the declaration required attestation in the “form of a deed.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The court invalidated the amendment based upon the improper attestation.<span style="color: black; font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman";">. <o:p></o:p></span><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; tab-stops: 28.0pt 56.0pt 84.0pt 112.0pt 140.0pt 168.0pt 196.0pt 224.0pt 3.5in 280.0pt 308.0pt 336.0pt; text-autospace: none;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="color: black; font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman";">Nikolai v. Deer Run Owners’ Association</span></i><span style="color: black; font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman";">, 2009 Ohio App. LEXIS 5525 (Ohio App. 2009) </span>held that the shifting of a roof’s status from common area to limited common area, (in order to shift maintenance responsibility),<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>constituted a change in the “Units” and thus required unanimity.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; tab-stops: 28.0pt 56.0pt 84.0pt 112.0pt 140.0pt 168.0pt 196.0pt 224.0pt 3.5in 280.0pt 308.0pt 336.0pt; text-autospace: none;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; tab-stops: 28.0pt 56.0pt 84.0pt 112.0pt 140.0pt 168.0pt 196.0pt 224.0pt 3.5in 280.0pt 308.0pt 336.0pt; text-autospace: none;"><span style="color: black; font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman";">In <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Platt v. Aspenwood Condominium Association, Inc.</i>, 214 P.3d 1060 (Colo. App., 2009), the association developed two lots on the common area, and then contracted with members for the purchase of one of the lots.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The association demanded supermajority consent for the sale, and the court affirmed that action.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The court, however, questioned the association’s good faith.<o:p></o:p></span><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; tab-stops: 28.0pt 56.0pt 84.0pt 112.0pt 140.0pt 168.0pt 196.0pt 224.0pt 3.5in 280.0pt 308.0pt 336.0pt; text-autospace: none;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; tab-stops: 28.0pt 56.0pt 84.0pt 112.0pt 140.0pt 168.0pt 196.0pt 224.0pt 3.5in 280.0pt 308.0pt 336.0pt; text-autospace: none;"><span style="color: black; font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman";">The association’s letter seeking approval, however, indicated that the sales may have been under contract at too low of a price, and pointed out that the association’s failure to approve the sale would have reduced the assessments for all unit owners. <o:p></o:p></span><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; tab-stops: 28.0pt 56.0pt 84.0pt 112.0pt 140.0pt 168.0pt 196.0pt 224.0pt 3.5in 280.0pt 308.0pt 336.0pt; text-autospace: none;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; tab-stops: 28.0pt 56.0pt 84.0pt 112.0pt 140.0pt 168.0pt 196.0pt 224.0pt 3.5in 280.0pt 308.0pt 336.0pt; text-autospace: none;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="color: black; font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman";">Raphael v. Silverman</span></i><span style="color: black; font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman";">, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 17689 (Fla. App., 2009) involved an association board’s decision to replace balcony dividers with transparent, rather than opague, dividers.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The Raphaels sued the association and the board members individually.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The plaintiffs’ allegations of self-dealing on behalf of the unit owners were dismissed, in the absence of evidence respecting any particular individual benefit to the board members.<o:p></o:p></span><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; tab-stops: 28.0pt 56.0pt 84.0pt 112.0pt 140.0pt 168.0pt 196.0pt 224.0pt 3.5in 280.0pt 308.0pt 336.0pt; text-autospace: none;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; tab-stops: 28.0pt 56.0pt 84.0pt 112.0pt 140.0pt 168.0pt 196.0pt 224.0pt 3.5in 280.0pt 308.0pt 336.0pt; text-autospace: none;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="color: black; font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman";">Cohn v. The Grand Condominium Association, Inc.,</span></i><span style="color: black; font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman";"> 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 16833 (Fla. App., 2009) involved a mixed use community.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>After the formation of the association, Florida law changed, requiring a majority control by residential owners.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Many years later, that statute was further amended, to make it retroactive.<o:p></o:p></span><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; tab-stops: 28.0pt 56.0pt 84.0pt 112.0pt 140.0pt 168.0pt 196.0pt 224.0pt 3.5in 280.0pt 308.0pt 336.0pt; text-autospace: none;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; tab-stops: 28.0pt 56.0pt 84.0pt 112.0pt 140.0pt 168.0pt 196.0pt 224.0pt 3.5in 280.0pt 308.0pt 336.0pt; text-autospace: none;"><span style="color: black; font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman";">The commercial owners raised a constitutional argument, that asserted that no law could abridge contractual rights.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The court imposed a balancing test, starting with an implied limitation requiring a substantial impairment.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The court found this to be a substantial impairment on the association’s voting structure, and found for the commercial and retail owners. <o:p></o:p></span><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; tab-stops: 28.0pt 56.0pt 84.0pt 112.0pt 140.0pt 168.0pt 196.0pt 224.0pt 3.5in 280.0pt 308.0pt 336.0pt; text-autospace: none;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; tab-stops: 28.0pt 56.0pt 84.0pt 112.0pt 140.0pt 168.0pt 196.0pt 224.0pt 3.5in 280.0pt 308.0pt 336.0pt; text-autospace: none;"><span style="color: black; font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman";">Wil Washington calls the <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Village of Doral Place Association, Inc., v. For Sale by Owner Realty, Inc</i>., 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 15540 (Fla. App., 2009). , the “Nightmare on Doral Place” suit.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Shortly after the transition, the manager received a tax notice on the property on which the association was owned for $2,593.85, which was not paid; another party bought the property and fenced off the pool.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The tax sale was affirmed; ultimately the association had to buy the property back from the subsequent pool owner.<o:p></o:p></span><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; tab-stops: 28.0pt 56.0pt 84.0pt 112.0pt 140.0pt 168.0pt 196.0pt 224.0pt 3.5in 280.0pt 308.0pt 336.0pt; text-autospace: none;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; tab-stops: 28.0pt 56.0pt 84.0pt 112.0pt 140.0pt 168.0pt 196.0pt 224.0pt 3.5in 280.0pt 308.0pt 336.0pt; text-autospace: none;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="color: black; font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman";">Comcast of Florida, L.P. v. L’Ambiance Beach Condominium Association, Inc</span></i><span style="color: black; font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman";">., 17 So. 3d 839 (Fla. App., 2009) involved a dispute as to the continued enforcement of a developer’s contract following transition.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The association succeeded in determining that the developer had properly reserved the right to terminate the contract at the time of transition. <o:p></o:p></span><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; tab-stops: 28.0pt 56.0pt 84.0pt 112.0pt 140.0pt 168.0pt 196.0pt 224.0pt 3.5in 280.0pt 308.0pt 336.0pt; text-autospace: none;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; tab-stops: 28.0pt 56.0pt 84.0pt 112.0pt 140.0pt 168.0pt 196.0pt 224.0pt 3.5in 280.0pt 308.0pt 336.0pt; text-autospace: none;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="color: black; font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman";">Lake Forest Master Community Association, Inc. v. Orlando Lake Forest Joint Venture</span></i><span style="color: black; font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman";">, 10 So. 3d 1187 (Fla. App., 2009) was a construction defect case; the developer sought to have the suit dismissed based upon an alleged failure to seek association approval of a lawsuit.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In fact, however, the lawsuit had been approved in a third rescheduled meeting; the developer challenged the propriety of notice for the third rescheduled meeting.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The court noted that the association had properly followed the procedure for the meetings; unfortunately, the association’s minutes of the second meeting failed to note the adjournment of the meeting.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Parol evidence was allowed, and the association’s secretary recalled the adjournment and re-notice.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The developer’s last argument, that the majority vote requirement was a requirement for a majority of all, also failed.<o:p></o:p></span><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; tab-stops: 28.0pt 56.0pt 84.0pt 112.0pt 140.0pt 168.0pt 196.0pt 224.0pt 3.5in 280.0pt 308.0pt 336.0pt; text-autospace: none;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; tab-stops: 28.0pt 56.0pt 84.0pt 112.0pt 140.0pt 168.0pt 196.0pt 224.0pt 3.5in 280.0pt 308.0pt 336.0pt; text-autospace: none;"><b><i><span style="color: black; font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri;">Covenant Enforcement<o:p></o:p></span></i></b><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; tab-stops: 28.0pt 56.0pt 84.0pt 112.0pt 140.0pt 168.0pt 196.0pt 224.0pt 3.5in 280.0pt 308.0pt 336.0pt; text-autospace: none;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; tab-stops: 28.0pt 56.0pt 84.0pt 112.0pt 140.0pt 168.0pt 196.0pt 224.0pt 3.5in 280.0pt 308.0pt 336.0pt; text-autospace: none;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="color: black; font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman";">Musgrove v. Westridge Street Partners I, LLC</span></i><span style="color: black; font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman";">, 2009 Tex. App. LEXIS 2660 (Tex. App., 2009). <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Covenants imposed in the 1940s required single-family homes and greenspace; for many years thereafter, they were ignored.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>One of the remaining two lot owners offered to sell his lot to the developer; the developer declined, and the would-be seller sued.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The court noted that no one had sought to sue for fifty years; indeed the court found that the seller was unaware of the covenants until after he sued.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The court found that the restriction had been abandoned.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The unit owner tried to argue that the non-waiver clause precluded this result, but the court held the non-waiver clause to have been abandoned.<o:p></o:p></span><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; tab-stops: 28.0pt 56.0pt 84.0pt 112.0pt 140.0pt 168.0pt 196.0pt 224.0pt 3.5in 280.0pt 308.0pt 336.0pt; text-autospace: none;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; tab-stops: 28.0pt 56.0pt 84.0pt 112.0pt 140.0pt 168.0pt 196.0pt 224.0pt 3.5in 280.0pt 308.0pt 336.0pt; text-autospace: none;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="color: black; font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman";">Schwartz v. Banbury Woods Homeowners Association, Inc</span></i><span style="color: black; font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman";">., 675 S.E. 2d 382 (N.C. App., 2009). <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This 14-page opinion, according to George Nowack, answers the question of whether a motor home is a camper.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The owners said that their use of the motor home as an extra bedroom, occasional refrigerator and “granny unit” excluded them from the otherwise applicable screening requirement.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></span><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; tab-stops: 28.0pt 56.0pt 84.0pt 112.0pt 140.0pt 168.0pt 196.0pt 224.0pt 3.5in 280.0pt 308.0pt 336.0pt; text-autospace: none;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; tab-stops: 28.0pt 56.0pt 84.0pt 112.0pt 140.0pt 168.0pt 196.0pt 224.0pt 3.5in 280.0pt 308.0pt 336.0pt; text-autospace: none;"><span style="color: black; font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman";">The owner relied upon the motor vehicle code, suggesting that the distinction between a self-propelled vehicle and a camper in the statute was relevant; the court made a historical inquiry and decided that a motor home was, indeed, a camper.<o:p></o:p></span><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; tab-stops: 28.0pt 56.0pt 84.0pt 112.0pt 140.0pt 168.0pt 196.0pt 224.0pt 3.5in 280.0pt 308.0pt 336.0pt; text-autospace: none;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; tab-stops: 28.0pt 56.0pt 84.0pt 112.0pt 140.0pt 168.0pt 196.0pt 224.0pt 3.5in 280.0pt 308.0pt 336.0pt; text-autospace: none;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="color: black; font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman";">Fox v. Madsen</span></i><span style="color: black; font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman";">, 12 So. 3d 1261 (Fla. App., 2009) dealt with the statute of limitations in a challenge to a condominium declaration amendment; the court found the applicable statute to be the 5-year statute respecting contracts. <o:p></o:p></span><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; tab-stops: 28.0pt 56.0pt 84.0pt 112.0pt 140.0pt 168.0pt 196.0pt 224.0pt 3.5in 280.0pt 308.0pt 336.0pt; text-autospace: none;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; tab-stops: 28.0pt 56.0pt 84.0pt 112.0pt 140.0pt 168.0pt 196.0pt 224.0pt 3.5in 280.0pt 308.0pt 336.0pt; text-autospace: none;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="color: black; font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman";">Westgate v. Laumbach</span></i><span style="color: black; font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman";">, 966 A. 2d 349 (Del., 2009) involved a Quonset hut installed right on the boundary of a lot. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The court took testimony from neighbors; testimony indicated the hut owner was irritable and the structure was a nuisance.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The owner removed the hut, but left the contract.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The court enjoined future misconduct, and the owner argued that he was being subjected to “selective enforcement.”<o:p></o:p></span><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; tab-stops: 28.0pt 56.0pt 84.0pt 112.0pt 140.0pt 168.0pt 196.0pt 224.0pt 3.5in 280.0pt 308.0pt 336.0pt; text-autospace: none;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; tab-stops: 28.0pt 56.0pt 84.0pt 112.0pt 140.0pt 168.0pt 196.0pt 224.0pt 3.5in 280.0pt 308.0pt 336.0pt; text-autospace: none;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="color: black; font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman";">Lallo v. Szabo</span></i><span style="color: black; font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman";">, 911 N.E. 2d 788 (Mass. App., 2009) was a two-unit duplex; the upstairs owner wanted to expand into the attic, which was a common area. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The covenants required arbitration in the event of a dispute; the upstairs owner insisted upon arbitration.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The downstairs owner pointed out that the arbitrator would be unable to provide a remedy, hence making the arbitration clause inapplicable.<o:p></o:p></span><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; tab-stops: 28.0pt 56.0pt 84.0pt 112.0pt 140.0pt 168.0pt 196.0pt 224.0pt 3.5in 280.0pt 308.0pt 336.0pt; text-autospace: none;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; tab-stops: 28.0pt 56.0pt 84.0pt 112.0pt 140.0pt 168.0pt 196.0pt 224.0pt 3.5in 280.0pt 308.0pt 336.0pt; text-autospace: none;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="color: black; font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman";">Abril Meadows Homeowner’s Association v. Castro</span></i><span style="color: black; font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman";">, 211 P. 3d 64 (Colo. App., 2009) involved an attempt to impose fines upon an owner who modified without consent; the declaration had been recorded without a signature.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The lack of a signature resulted in a remand to the trial court for imposition of appropriate attorneys’ fees. <o:p></o:p></span><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; tab-stops: 28.0pt 56.0pt 84.0pt 112.0pt 140.0pt 168.0pt 196.0pt 224.0pt 3.5in 280.0pt 308.0pt 336.0pt; text-autospace: none;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; tab-stops: 28.0pt 56.0pt 84.0pt 112.0pt 140.0pt 168.0pt 196.0pt 224.0pt 3.5in 280.0pt 308.0pt 336.0pt; text-autospace: none;"><b><i><span style="color: black; font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri;">Covenant Interpretation<o:p></o:p></span></i></b><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; tab-stops: 28.0pt 56.0pt 84.0pt 112.0pt 140.0pt 168.0pt 196.0pt 224.0pt 3.5in 280.0pt 308.0pt 336.0pt; text-autospace: none;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; tab-stops: 28.0pt 56.0pt 84.0pt 112.0pt 140.0pt 168.0pt 196.0pt 224.0pt 3.5in 280.0pt 308.0pt 336.0pt; text-autospace: none;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="color: black; font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman";">Fawn Lake Maintenance Commission v. Aldons Abers</span></i><span style="color: black; font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman";">, 202 P. 3d 1019 (Wash. App., 2009) involved a discussion between an association president and an owner; the lots were combined with the governmental agency, but there was no agreement with the association.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The association limited access and rights, but continued to impose assessments on two lots.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>52 other lot owners, many of whom owned more than one lot, were treated similarly.<o:p></o:p></span><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; tab-stops: 28.0pt 56.0pt 84.0pt 112.0pt 140.0pt 168.0pt 196.0pt 224.0pt 3.5in 280.0pt 308.0pt 336.0pt; text-autospace: none;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; tab-stops: 28.0pt 56.0pt 84.0pt 112.0pt 140.0pt 168.0pt 196.0pt 224.0pt 3.5in 280.0pt 308.0pt 336.0pt; text-autospace: none;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="color: black; font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman";">Starlight Ridge South Homeowners Association v. Hunter-Bloor</span></i><span style="color: black; font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman";">, 99 Cal. Rptr. 3d 20 (Cal. App., 2009) involved a property with various concrete channels to deal with erosion.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>An owner with a channel in her lot refused to maintain her lot; the declaration language was in conflict, but the more specific provision, dealing with channel maintenance, controlled.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The owner was required to maintain the lot. <o:p></o:p></span><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; tab-stops: 28.0pt 56.0pt 84.0pt 112.0pt 140.0pt 168.0pt 196.0pt 224.0pt 3.5in 280.0pt 308.0pt 336.0pt; text-autospace: none;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; tab-stops: 28.0pt 56.0pt 84.0pt 112.0pt 140.0pt 168.0pt 196.0pt 224.0pt 3.5in 280.0pt 308.0pt 336.0pt; text-autospace: none;"><span style="color: black; font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman";">In <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">1230-1250 Twenty-Third Street Condominium Unit Owners Association, Inc. v. Bolandz</i>, 978 A. 2d 1188 (D.C. App., 2009) an owner made an enclosure surrounding his balcony, in part to protect his unit from water damage.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The court found that the unapproved modification was a violation of the covenants, but that the association’s failure to maintain, despite repeated requests, warranted the continuance of the modifications.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The unit owner was awarded $157,000 in attorneys fees. <o:p></o:p></span><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; tab-stops: 28.0pt 56.0pt 84.0pt 112.0pt 140.0pt 168.0pt 196.0pt 224.0pt 3.5in 280.0pt 308.0pt 336.0pt; text-autospace: none;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; tab-stops: 28.0pt 56.0pt 84.0pt 112.0pt 140.0pt 168.0pt 196.0pt 224.0pt 3.5in 280.0pt 308.0pt 336.0pt; text-autospace: none;"><b><i><span style="color: black; font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri;">Fair Housing<o:p></o:p></span></i></b><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; tab-stops: 28.0pt 56.0pt 84.0pt 112.0pt 140.0pt 168.0pt 196.0pt 224.0pt 3.5in 280.0pt 308.0pt 336.0pt; text-autospace: none;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; tab-stops: 28.0pt 56.0pt 84.0pt 112.0pt 140.0pt 168.0pt 196.0pt 224.0pt 3.5in 280.0pt 308.0pt 336.0pt; text-autospace: none;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="color: black; font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman";">Bloch v. Frischolz</span></i><span style="color: black; font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman";">, 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 24917 (7</span><span style="color: black; font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: 7.5pt; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman";">th </span><span style="color: black; font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman";">Cir., 2009) is a continuation of a case involving the installation of a mezuzah in a common area.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The court considered whether the enforcement of the rule, however, was neutral. <o:p></o:p></span><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; tab-stops: 28.0pt 56.0pt 84.0pt 112.0pt 140.0pt 168.0pt 196.0pt 224.0pt 3.5in 280.0pt 308.0pt 336.0pt; text-autospace: none;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; tab-stops: 28.0pt 56.0pt 84.0pt 112.0pt 140.0pt 168.0pt 196.0pt 224.0pt 3.5in 280.0pt 308.0pt 336.0pt; text-autospace: none;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="color: black; font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman";">Overlook Mutual Homes, Inc., v. Spencer</span></i><span style="color: black; font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman";">, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 105100 (S.D. Ohio, 2009) is a companion animal case.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The owner sought an accommodation to keep their daughter’s dog “Scooby.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The court made a distinction between the ADA regulations and HUD regulations dealing with HUD-administered housing.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Scooby was allowed to stay. <o:p></o:p></span><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; tab-stops: 28.0pt 56.0pt 84.0pt 112.0pt 140.0pt 168.0pt 196.0pt 224.0pt 3.5in 280.0pt 308.0pt 336.0pt; text-autospace: none;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; tab-stops: 28.0pt 56.0pt 84.0pt 112.0pt 140.0pt 168.0pt 196.0pt 224.0pt 3.5in 280.0pt 308.0pt 336.0pt; text-autospace: none;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="color: black; font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman";">Hawn v. Shoreline Towers Phase I Condominium Association, Inc</span></i><span style="color: black; font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman";">., 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 24846 (N.D. Fla., 2009) was another pet case; the owner returned from vacation with his dog, “Booster.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The first letter failed to make any mention of the alleged service nature of the dog; the later letter asserted that Booster was necessary for psychological reasons, and that Booster was now “certified.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The association sought supporting medical information.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Booster’s owner pursued his claim in the applicable agency and prevailed; the matter then went to court.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The owner’s failure to provide the information relieved the association from liability<o:p></o:p></span><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; tab-stops: 28.0pt 56.0pt 84.0pt 112.0pt 140.0pt 168.0pt 196.0pt 224.0pt 3.5in 280.0pt 308.0pt 336.0pt; text-autospace: none;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; tab-stops: 28.0pt 56.0pt 84.0pt 112.0pt 140.0pt 168.0pt 196.0pt 224.0pt 3.5in 280.0pt 308.0pt 336.0pt; text-autospace: none;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="color: black; font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman";">Stross v. The Gables Condominium Association</span></i><span style="color: black; font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman";">, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 52918 (W.D. Wash., 2009) involved a woman with severe disabilities who wanted 12 rather than the otherwise available 4 keys for her various caregivers and emergency responders.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>She agreed to consent to a lockbox, to which the board agreed, but only on the condition that she signed numerous documents.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The court restrained the association and gave her the option of selecting either the 12 keys or the lockbox, and affirmatively released her from the obligation to sign any documents in connection with her choice. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></span><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; tab-stops: 28.0pt 56.0pt 84.0pt 112.0pt 140.0pt 168.0pt 196.0pt 224.0pt 3.5in 280.0pt 308.0pt 336.0pt; text-autospace: none;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><!--EndFragment-->Lincoln W. Hobbs, Esq., CCALhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12994231030469325010noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34130788.post-31307860931580551292010-01-22T21:19:00.000-08:002010-01-22T21:19:14.885-08:00Law Conference -- The Panel of Pundits<div class="MsoNormal">This afternoon’s session is the opportunity for an interactive session, with five practitioners fielding and responding to questions from the audience, and audience members jumping in.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Questions have been submitted in advance, and can be submitted from the floor.<br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoListParagraph" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -.25in;"><br />
</div><ul><li><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">·<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span></span>Jim Strichartz, from Washington, says that his firm has 75 active foreclosures pending against lenders, with their goal being to get title to the property, and collect rent through a court-appointed receiver.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Other associations are seeking to remove bank-owned units from the association’s blanket insurance policies, so as to force the lenders to obtain (and pay for) their own insurance.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Obviously, that decision creates some significant risk, particularly where the uninsured units are integrated with other units.</li>
<li> Several attorneys in the audience have obtained loans for their client associations through the Small Business Administration to cover uninsured casualty losses arising from earthquakes in California and floods in Georgia.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>There are some interesting issues as to how (or if) those loans are being secured.</li>
<li> <span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;"><span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span></span>The firm of Hindman Sanchez, in Colorado, offers a monthly “foreclosure hotline” to which homeowners can call in their foreclosure questions.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Loura Sancez reports that they’re not getting many calls, and the services would otherwise be free to their flat-fee clients, but she thinks it’s good marketing…</li>
<li><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;"><span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span></span>Much of the discussion has now moved to how to deal with the confusing collection issues that are arising daily in today’s economy.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Lots of firms report that clients are moving based upon dissatisfaction with their attorneys’ collection success rates based upon historical expectations.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></li>
<li><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;"><span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span></span>David Swedelson is concerned about his associations that are deferring maintenance and repairs on their associations.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>He was watching the news and saw an interview with a client board member, who was explaining that they couldn’t afford to repair the crater.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Needless to say, he called his client the next day to tell him to advise that they fix it immediately.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Some things cannot be deferred.</li>
<li><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;"><span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span></span>George Nowack <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>and the members of<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>his firm are adding language to their declarations specifically providing that apathetic unit owners who don’t respond to several overtures for a vote will be deemed to support “whatever the association wants.”</li>
<li><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;"><span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span></span>Several panelists and audience members are seeing their clients get unintentionally immersed into collection agency contracts that take not only past due, but also future assessments.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>And no one on the panel or in the audience believes that credit reporting is of assistance.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></li>
<li><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;"><span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"><span style="font-family: Symbol;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: medium;"> </span></span> </span></span></span>George Nowack reports that many of his firm’s associations are offering amnesty or partial amnesty on getting something.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>These decisions, made on a case-by-case basis can be warranted by the business judgment rule.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Furthermore, associations have some flexibility in connection with late fees and interest.</li>
</ul><br />
<!--EndFragment-->Lincoln W. Hobbs, Esq., CCALhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12994231030469325010noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34130788.post-20807950281051374462010-01-22T21:13:00.000-08:002010-01-22T21:13:14.162-08:00Trying to Live Blog the Law Conference...today was frustrating, to say the least. Some rooms had wireless; others did not. And I foolishly left my wireless modem at home, or at the office. Wherever it is, it's not here.<br />
<br />
At any rate, I was typing away during several presentations. And though they're far from live, I will post them. One in just a moment, and a few others in the morning.Lincoln W. Hobbs, Esq., CCALhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12994231030469325010noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34130788.post-43947954356463720792010-01-22T10:08:00.000-08:002010-01-22T10:21:16.459-08:00CCAL Seminar -- Fraud in AssociationsI'm at a session now on fraud in associations; there's several hundred people here, and a show of hands reveals that a large majority -- probably 90% -- of the audience has had an association that was victimized by fraud. Clearly it's happening a lot, and it's probably only being discovered some of the time.<br />
<br />
Multivest Management was a major case of embezzlement; one of the principals of the company managed to embezzle 3.4 million from about 50 associations over a 7 year period.<br />
<br />
One association in the state of Ohio resulted in a $650,000 loss.<br />
<br />
Another association was victimized by a management team where the maintenance man, in connection with the accountant, was fabricating maintenance reports and getting paid on them. Several associations have been victimized by improper use of credit cards. (And indeed I personally served on a CAI ethics investigation involving improper personal use of a credit card.)<br />
<br />
Another association was taken over by a disgruntled owner who took over an association by gaining the trust of other recent immigrants; the individual obtained control, took over the management duties, embezzled and stopped paying his assessments. The 95 unit association lost over $130,000.<br />
<br />
An association with a volunteer owner/treasurer resulted in the loss of more than $80,000 from a 75 unit association.<br />
<br />
Turning to prevention ideas, suggestions include:<br />
<br />
Segregation of duties:<br />
<br />
First, make certain there is no comingling of your association's funds. Have them tied to your association's tax ID;<br />
Use a lockbox system for receipt of assessments;<br />
Segregate and monitor the association's reserves.<br />
<br />
Oversight:<br />
<br />
Require duplicate bank statements an assure that the person reconciling the account is other than the one writing the checks;<br />
Enable online account review;<br />
Compare invoices with the corresponding checks;<br />
If the association allows credit card, have a low limit and monitor the invoices.<br />
<br />
Third Parties<br />
<br />
Get banking services from reputable lenders<br />
Consult with a qualified agent and get adequate coverages (and remember that D & O coverage is not the same as fidelity coverage.<br />
Hire a qualified third party CPA to conduct reviews at a minimum, and even better yet, audits.<br />
<br />
<br />
When obtaining insurance, make certain that everyone with access to money is covered. Be aware of what the discovery requirements are, and what will invalidate your coverage.<br />
<br />
The secondary mortgage market is requiring coverage for three months worth of assessments; there is no penalty for noncompliance, but noncompliance will complicate the ability to finance units.Lincoln W. Hobbs, Esq., CCALhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12994231030469325010noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34130788.post-39378812046390496272010-01-21T16:23:00.000-08:002010-01-21T16:23:43.556-08:00CCAL Law Conference -- Rental RestrictionsThe first session that I'm attending is on rental restrictions in community associations; the presenters are David Ramsey, Esq., CCAL and Jennifer Loheac, Esq., lawyers from the New Jersey firm of Greenbaum, Rowe, Smith, Davis, LLP.<br />
<br />
New Jersey, like Utah, has no cases specifically on associations' rights and abilities to amend to restrict rentals, although a case dealing with parking, ________, touches on the rights associated with property ownership.<br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br />
</span><br />
<div style="font: 12.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: medium;">Woodside Village VIII Condo. Ass’n. v. McClernan</span></span><span style="font: 12.0px Helvetica;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: medium;">,<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Times;"> 806 So. 2d 452, (Fla. 2002), involved a restriction on rentals which allowed short term rentals without association consent, and longer term (over one year) leases with the consent of the board. Ultimately, the board sought to allow rentals for only nine months of a year. New purchasers could not lease their units until they had owned for a year.</span></span></span></span><br />
</div><br />
An investor continued to rent in violation of the restriction; the association sued and the defendant counterclaimed. The lower courts held for the defendant/owner; the Supreme Court reversed. <br />
<br />
One side note to the Woodside Village case arose from Woodside's having had set aside 6 units for disabled rentals; that led to a challenge and partial settlement. <br />
<br />
In <span style="font-family: inherit;">Seagate Condominium Association v. Duffy, 330 So.2d 484 (4</span><span style="font: 8.0px Helvetica;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: medium;">th </span></span></span><span style="font-family: inherit;">District </span><span style="font-family: inherit;">Ct. App. 1976)</span> , the challenge arose in connection with an allegation that the rental restrictions unduly "restrained the alienation' of units.<br />
<br />
The rental restriction had been passed by 96% of the units. The unit owner rented to college students; a lawsuit ensued. Florida had limited only absolute and near absolute restrictions; the restriction on leasing was not absolute. The court indicated that these amendments would be reviewed in the context of reasonableness; impliedly, at least, the 96% sentiment was significant.<br />
<br />
<span style="font: 12.0px 'Times New Roman';"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: medium;">Breene v. Plaza Tower Ass’n</span></span></span><span style="font-family: inherit;">, 310 N.W. 2d 730 (N.D. 1981), </span>involved a declaration that prohibited various types of actions; the association prohibited almost all leasing. Breene sued; prevailed at the trial court, and the association appealed. The court precluded any amendment with a retroactive effect or effect on current owners; presumably they considered these rights too significant to allow change of rights as to existing owners.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Shorewood West Condo. Ass’n v. Sadri</span><span style="font: 12.0px Helvetica;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: medium;">,</span></span></span> 992 P.2d 1008 (Wash. 2000), involved a challenge from investor/buyers, but the lower court precluded the retroactivity of the provision. The Court of Appeals reversed, and it was further appealed to the Supreme Court. The change in the bylaws was found to be invalid; had the amendment been in the declaration, owners would have notice of the change.<br />
<span style="font-family: Helvetica;"><span style="font-family: Times;"><br />
</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Charter Club on the River Home Owners Ass'n v. Walker, (Unreported, Georgia Court of Appeals, 2009 Ga. App. LEXIS 1397),</span> involved another challenge by a unit owner who was renting, and continued to rent, after the amendment. Georgia's statute imposed amendments which restricted "use" without the owner's consent. Georgia's court started out by asserting that restrictions in declarations will be strictly construed. Leasing property is a type of "use;" hence the statute precluded the restriction. The question arising from this case is whether it can be applied to those who voted in favor of it (yes, according to a Georgia lawyer at the seminar) and whether it can be applied against those who didn't vote (no, according to the same lawyer).<br />
<span style="font-family: Helvetica;"><span style="font-family: Times;"><br />
</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Villa De Law Palmas Homeowners Ass'n v. Terifaj, 121 Cal. Rptr. 2d 780 (Court of Appeal 2002)</span> involved a restriction adopted by rule; the owner challenged the rule and the trial court questioned the validity of the rule. The association then made the rule into an amendment, and the court's inclinations shifted. <br />
<br />
Apple Valley Gardens v. McCutta , from Wisconsin, involved a developer who retained some units; the association amended to prohibit them. The declaration, from the outset, had impliedly allowed rentals through such provisions as one providing that the lease of a unit would not relieve the buyer of an obligation to pay the assessments.<br />
<br />
The bylaw amendment was held to be acceptable, and not contrary to the declaration, and lastly the limitation was not an unreasonable restraint on alienation. <br />
<br />
Villas West 2 v. McLauthen involved Fair Housing Act challenge to a rental restriction. The purchaser bought after the rental restriction was in place; the McLaughlins both moved from the house. The daughter attempted to rent the house; the no-lease provision was alleged to have a disparate effect on minorities. The rental restriction had an adverse impact on minorities; in the disparate impact, the association could respond only by showing a good reason for the rule. The speakers anticipate more of these fair-housing based challenges to rental restrictions.<br />
<br />
Moving onto "tips for the practitioner," the speakers suggest:<br />
<br />
<ul><li>Include a hardship exception, to make the amendment seem more palatable to owners and the courts;</li>
<li>Make the hardship exceptions objective, to protect arguments respecting arbitrariness;</li>
<li>Don't even try to take away vested rights (e.g., such as terminating an existing lease);</li>
<li>Better in the declaration than the bylaws, (or even worse, a regulation;</li>
</ul><div>And now there's an interesting discussion about whether or not grandfathering is acceptable, and if so, how do you do it. (There's a practical side to this, both in connection with getting votes and avoiding lawsuits.)</div><div><br />
</div><div><br />
</div>Lincoln W. Hobbs, Esq., CCALhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12994231030469325010noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34130788.post-89177241201445613792010-01-15T10:43:00.000-08:002010-01-15T12:02:59.223-08:00Live Blogging -- 2010 Legislative UpdateI'm at the Utah State Capitol (East Senate Building, actually) for the Utah Chapter of the Community Association Institute's (UCCAI) monthly luncheon; the topic today will be the 2010 legislative session, and particularly the Legislature's anticipated consideration of the Uniform Common Interest Association Act (UCIOA).<br />
<br />
John Morris, chair of the UCCAI Legislative Action Committee, is introducing the event and participants. Senate President Michael Waddoups is unable to participate, but is supportive of the legislation, and legislation related to community associations in general. Likewise, Wayne Niederhauser is covering for Senator Waddoups at another meeting and thus also unable to attend.<br />
<br />
Gage Froerer, the House sponsor of UCIOA, is running late, but anticipated to attend.<br />
<br />
Marla Mott-Smith is inviting contributions and pledges to the Utah LAC; pledges can be made to <a href="http://www.UtahLac.com/">www.UtahLac.com</a>.<br />
<br />
Andrew Fortin, Vice President of Government Affairs from the national office of the <a href="http://www.caionline.org/">Community Associations Institute</a> is discussing changes on the national level related to mortgage financing in the United States. Delinquency standards and pre-sale standards are chilling the mortgage markets. CAI and its members, he says, must be vigilant in watching the legislation on the state and federal level. Andrew is presenting a $3,000 check from the national office to support the Utah LAC's efforts.<br />
<br />
John Morris says there will be legislation on transfer fees this year; the problem arises from provisions requiring payments in perpetuity to a third party. That differs from legitimate transfer fees associated with many associations. Representative Webb is considering legislation on this issue. The fear is that the legislature may eliminate all transfer fees, regardless of their nature or proposed beneficiary.<br />
<br />
The discussion has now departed from legislation and headed to inquiries about the advisability and legality of board-imposed transfer fees and board-imposed special assessments. The consensus: just don't do it.<br />
<br />
Rich Vial is giving a history of the 7+ year history of trying to get Utah's community association laws updated. For about 4 years, people in the industry have been working on the drafting of the legislation, but the politics of attempting to pass the legislation lie ahead. Vial says that the legislation will not pass without the support of builders and realtors. Robert Rees says he's about 80% of the way through the review and editing of the proposed legislation.Lincoln W. Hobbs, Esq., CCALhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12994231030469325010noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34130788.post-67434511042389010652010-01-06T17:20:00.000-08:002010-01-06T17:20:03.454-08:00Last Call -- CCAL Law Seminar is only 14 Days Away!<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiyg_EwTmifwFiHNZGPtthHVXxcs0OtfwVGhQSg3GBh6voBKC8PsoYLTy27C_DG6qLPUBX41-0PIuXpbwrcgWx5V1486eDb7rxTZp6ZASJMzOhgfN67pDKN3Y7j6tJ8IC3ya-NSNA/s1600-h/saguaro.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiyg_EwTmifwFiHNZGPtthHVXxcs0OtfwVGhQSg3GBh6voBKC8PsoYLTy27C_DG6qLPUBX41-0PIuXpbwrcgWx5V1486eDb7rxTZp6ZASJMzOhgfN67pDKN3Y7j6tJ8IC3ya-NSNA/s640/saguaro.jpg" /></a><br />
</div><br />
Don't forget that the College of Community Association Lawyers' 31st Annual Law Seminar will be held in sunny (and less polluted) Tucson two weeks from tomorrow; you can still register <a href="http://www.caionline.org/EVENTS/LAWSEM/Pages/2010.aspx">here.</a><br />
<br />
And if you can't go, you should watch this site for information from the conference. I'll be live-blogging the sessions that I attend, and if <a href="http://www.haolaw.com/JulieLadle.html">Julie Ladle</a> is at another, she'll post a summary as well. Topics to be discussed will include (among many other matters): difficult people, the economy (of course), rental restrictions, Chinese drywall, contested elections and the unauthorized practice of law.<br />
<br />
And, of course, there will be case law and legislative updates.Lincoln W. Hobbs, Esq., CCALhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12994231030469325010noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34130788.post-9571328970749509252009-12-31T16:49:00.000-08:002009-12-31T16:49:25.998-08:00Rolf Berger, 1951-2009<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjLw0X1pqXpBeHRXau3ff8TV32OkUijBwi3l-0oieWJsuE7vCt8wG7637GY2GftSrgpQ_ZGryi_xg7yivu1-r8fi98BLL7T8IbAYrb7-hUrbADZL7hMNW4oBi7Kq-Gn8HdYwpfcAw/s1600-h/Rolf+Berger.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjLw0X1pqXpBeHRXau3ff8TV32OkUijBwi3l-0oieWJsuE7vCt8wG7637GY2GftSrgpQ_ZGryi_xg7yivu1-r8fi98BLL7T8IbAYrb7-hUrbADZL7hMNW4oBi7Kq-Gn8HdYwpfcAw/s320/Rolf+Berger.jpg" /></a><br />
</div>The Utah legal community, and particularly the Utah community association law community, lost a very good friend and colleague, Rolf Berger, earlier this week.<br />
<br />
Here's Rolf's obituary, from the Salt Lake Tribune and Deseret News:<br />
<blockquote><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse; color: #333333; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12px;">Rolf Helmut Berger 1951 ~ 2009 Rolf Helmut Berger, 58, passed away at his home on December 28, 2009 surrounded by his family after a bout with cancer.Rolf is survived by his beloved wife, Carla McBride Berger, children David Rolf Berger, Nicholas James Berger (Jessica), Joseph Helmut Berger (Amanda), and Alisa Jane Saba (Bryan). His grandchildren, Alexis, Andrew, Madeline, Avery, and Lily adored their grandfather and were the delight of his life. He is preceded in death by daughter Katherine Johanna and his parents Helmut and Gerda Berger. Rolf was an active member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and worked as an attorney for the law firm of Kirton & McConkie. Rolf served many selflessly, and will be greatly missed. A viewing will be held at Larkin Sunset Gardens at 1950 East and 10600 South on Wed., December 30 from 6-8 p.m. Services will be held at the LDS Chapel at 9855 S. 2300 E. on Thurs., Dec. 31 at 12:00 noon, with a viewing one hour prior. In lieu of flowers donations may be made to the LDS Church's Perpetual Education Fund. </span></blockquote>Rolf was a great contributor and regular participant in the Utah Chapter of the Community Associations Institute, and contributed significant time and effort to the practice of community association law in Utah. <br />
<br />
Rolf will be greatly missed.<br />
<br />
Rest in Peace, Rolf.Lincoln W. Hobbs, Esq., CCALhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12994231030469325010noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34130788.post-61572245951874889332009-11-19T20:20:00.000-08:002009-11-19T20:20:02.326-08:00Check this Out -- GoogleLaw<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgLmCBc0Zzd48UsCQ-mt4MZwR7CBT2ZfwbfH8Nt_m_cDvPSiITljgycQjRIlme5VhacmxHlhk3uubXmZesmdyPmcKATv-0XoDtnHraWGQD1m4CzwZ_xJ2UQt7QINoIiBMAcacRmmA/s1600/googlescholar.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgLmCBc0Zzd48UsCQ-mt4MZwR7CBT2ZfwbfH8Nt_m_cDvPSiITljgycQjRIlme5VhacmxHlhk3uubXmZesmdyPmcKATv-0XoDtnHraWGQD1m4CzwZ_xJ2UQt7QINoIiBMAcacRmmA/s200/googlescholar.jpg" /></a><br />
</div>Google, in its continuing quest to take over the World, is entering the field of legal research. At a subpage of <a href="http://scholar.google.com/">Google scholar</a>, you can research cases by name or by citation.<br />
<br />
A search for <i>Hermansen v. Tasulis</i> pulled up 39 hits in .05 seconds; unbelievably faster than the alternatives, and presumably more thorough. The hits include the opinion itself; cases following the opinion and articles and briefs related to the opinion. A search for "Lincoln W. Hobbs" pulled up 16 reported opinions in which I've been involved, several of which I had forgotten. A rather handy research option for clients and counsel.<br />
<br />
The jury's still out (sorry) on how valuable this will be, but I'll be looking into it over the next while.<br />
<br />
To use the new resource, go to www.scholar.google.com, click on the legal opinions and journal option and type your query.Lincoln W. Hobbs, Esq., CCALhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12994231030469325010noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34130788.post-20579768029494936122009-10-29T18:39:00.000-07:002009-10-29T18:47:45.579-07:00Now Available on FacebookFor those of you who are a bit frustrated with following and trying to post comments through Blogger, I'm pleased to announce that I'm now on Facebook at the Utahcondolaw page. It appears it will be easier to post there.<br /><br />And for my Facebook friends who don't care about community association law, I will soon be pulling my Utahcondolaw feed from my personal page. (As soon as I figure out how it is feeding.)<br /><br />So, condo and other community association friends, if you want to follow this blog on Facebook, be sure to become a fan of the Uthacondolaw page. Other Facebook friends, please accept my apology for this and past boring posts on community association law. You can continue to look forward to my witty[?], inspiring[?], thoughful and always humble posts on Facebook.Lincoln W. Hobbs, Esq., CCALhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12994231030469325010noreply@blogger.com0