How is an Associaton governed?

Useful Rulings on Association Governance

Recent Rulings on Association Governance

JOEL ROTHSCHILD ET AL VS THE DESMOND CONDOMINIUM HOMEOWNERS

Because Plaintiff has not filed an opposition, there is no basis to find that Plaintiff’s rights to discover the information overcomes any privacy or confidentiality interest of the Board members and/or is not violative of the Davis-Sterling Act.

  • Hearing

    Feb 04, 2020

ARROWOOD MASTER ASSOCIATION VS ZURAWSKI

Zuraswki further argues that the "Community Guidelines" are unenforceable against him because, under the Davis-Sterling Act, which became effective in 2012 and the pertinent portion of which is codified at Civil Code § 4740(a) and read as follows: [a]n owner of a separate interest in a common interest development shall not be subject to a provision in a governing document or an amendment to a governing document that prohibits the rental or leasing of any of the separate interests in that common interest development

  • Hearing

    Jan 23, 2020

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Contract - Other

FINISTERRA CONDOMINIUMS ASSOCIATION, INC. VS. GARCIA

Cross-Complainant adds to her declaratory relief prayer, requesting “Declaratory relief for disputed issues relating to the association’s obligations under the Davis Sterling Act and the Rosenthal Act.” She still does not define an actual controversy for the Court to make a declaration of rights/duties, nor can she (arguably) given that these claims are barred by the statute of limitations. (See also Code Civ. Proc., § 1060.)

  • Hearing

    Nov 21, 2019

WELK RESORT GROUP INC VS. AVIARA RESIDENCE CLUB OWNER'S ASSOCIATION

On July 9, 2019, plaintiff Welk Resort Group, Inc. filed a second amended complaint asserting causes of action for breach of written contract (CC&Rs), breach of statutory duty (Davis Sterling Act), breach of statutory duty (Vacation Ownership Timeshare Act), breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, breach of fiduciary duty, fraud (concealment), fraud (intentional misrepresentation), negligent misrepresentation, and violation of unfair competition law.

  • Hearing

    Oct 31, 2019

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

GETZ V. SERRANO EL DORADO OWNER’S ASSOC.

HOA Proposed Class Notice Statement Regarding Unnamed Class Member Personal Liability for Attorney Fees and Costs if the HOA Prevails Defendant HOA’s proposed class notice includes the following warning: “The Plaintiff brings this lawsuit under Civil Code section 5975, which is part of the Davis-Sterling Common Interest Development Act, and which provides for the prevailing party in an action to enforce the CC&Rs to recover attorneys’ fees and costs from the non-prevailing party.

  • Hearing

    Oct 04, 2019

CAROLYN HARRIS VS. RICHARD HOLLOMAN

Paragraph 28 indicates it was Hollie Mallers, and Paragraph 92 indicates that Hollman was Plaintiffs' real estate agent, but does not indicate when. 6th cause of action for violation of Davis-Sterling Act. Sustain. In §§ 101 and 107, Plaintiff cites California Civil Code sections 1365.2, 1355, 1363.05, and 1365 as the statutes violated under the Davis-Stirling Act, but these statutes have all been repealed and are no longer operative. So, it is unclear what statutes this claim is being made under.

  • Hearing

    Sep 12, 2019

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

CAROLYN HARRIS VS. RICHARD HOLLOMAN

Paragraph 28 indicates it was Hollie Mallers, and Paragraph 92 indicates that Hollman was Plaintiffs' real estate agent, but does not indicate when. 6th cause of action for violation of Davis-Sterling Act. Sustain. In §§ 101 and 107, Plaintiff cites California Civil Code sections 1365.2, 1355, 1363.05, and 1365 as the statutes violated under the Davis-Stirling Act, but these statutes have all been repealed and are no longer operative. So, it is unclear what statutes this claim is being made under.

  • Hearing

    Sep 12, 2019

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

ARROWOOD MASTER ASSOCIATION VS ZURAWSKI

Zuraswki further argues that the "Community Guidelines" are unenforceable against him because, under the Davis-Sterling Act, which became effective in 2012 and the pertinent portion of which is codified at Civil Code § 4740(a) and read as follows: [a]n owner of a separate interest in a common interest development shall not be subject to a provision in a governing document or an amendment to a governing document that prohibits the rental or leasing of any of the separate interests in that common interest development

  • Hearing

    Jul 11, 2019

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Contract - Other

ARROWOOD MASTER ASSOCIATION VS ZURAWSKI

Zuraswki further argues that the "Community Guidelines" are unenforceable against him because, under the Davis-Sterling Act, which became effective in 2012 and the pertinent portion of which is codified at Civil Code § 4740(a) and read as follows: [a]n owner of a separate interest in a common interest development shall not be subject to a provision in a governing document or an amendment to a governing document that prohibits the rental or leasing of any of the separate interests in that common interest development

  • Hearing

    Jul 11, 2019

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Contract - Other

ARROWOOD MASTER ASSOCIATION VS ZURAWSKI

Zuraswki further argues that the "Community Guidelines" are unenforceable against him because, under the Davis-Sterling Act, which became effective in 2012 and the pertinent portion of which is codified at Civil Code § 4740(a) and read as follows: [a]n owner of a separate interest in a common interest development shall not be subject to a provision in a governing document or an amendment to a governing document that prohibits the rental or leasing of any of the separate interests in that common interest development

  • Hearing

    Jul 11, 2019

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Contract - Other

ARROWOOD MASTER ASSOCIATION VS ZURAWSKI

Zuraswki further argues that the "Community Guidelines" are unenforceable against him because, under the Davis-Sterling Act, which became effective in 2012 and the pertinent portion of which is codified at Civil Code § 4740(a) and read as follows: [a]n owner of a separate interest in a common interest development shall not be subject to a provision in a governing document or an amendment to a governing document that prohibits the rental or leasing of any of the separate interests in that common interest development

  • Hearing

    Jul 11, 2019

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Contract - Other

ARROWOOD MASTER ASSOCIATION VS ZURAWSKI

Zuraswki further argues that the "Community Guidelines" are unenforceable against him because, under the Davis-Sterling Act, which became effective in 2012 and the pertinent portion of which is codified at Civil Code § 4740(a) and read as follows: [a]n owner of a separate interest in a common interest development shall not be subject to a provision in a governing document or an amendment to a governing document that prohibits the rental or leasing of any of the separate interests in that common interest development

  • Hearing

    Jul 11, 2019

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Contract - Other

ARROWOOD MASTER ASSOCIATION VS ZURAWSKI

Zuraswki further argues that the "Community Guidelines" are unenforceable against him because, under the Davis-Sterling Act, which became effective in 2012 and the pertinent portion of which is codified at Civil Code § 4740(a) and read as follows: [a]n owner of a separate interest in a common interest development shall not be subject to a provision in a governing document or an amendment to a governing document that prohibits the rental or leasing of any of the separate interests in that common interest development

  • Hearing

    Jul 11, 2019

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Contract - Other

ARROWOOD MASTER ASSOCIATION VS ZURAWSKI

Zuraswki further argues that the "Community Guidelines" are unenforceable against him because, under the Davis-Sterling Act, which became effective in 2012 and the pertinent portion of which is codified at Civil Code § 4740(a) and read as follows: [a]n owner of a separate interest in a common interest development shall not be subject to a provision in a governing document or an amendment to a governing document that prohibits the rental or leasing of any of the separate interests in that common interest development

  • Hearing

    Jul 11, 2019

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Contract - Other

ARROWOOD MASTER ASSOCIATION VS ZURAWSKI

Zuraswki further argues that the "Community Guidelines" are unenforceable against him because, under the Davis-Sterling Act, which became effective in 2012 and the pertinent portion of which is codified at Civil Code § 4740(a) and read as follows: [a]n owner of a separate interest in a common interest development shall not be subject to a provision in a governing document or an amendment to a governing document that prohibits the rental or leasing of any of the separate interests in that common interest development

  • Hearing

    Jul 11, 2019

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Contract - Other

ARROWOOD MASTER ASSOCIATION VS ZURAWSKI

Zuraswki further argues that the "Community Guidelines" are unenforceable against him because, under the Davis-Sterling Act, which became effective in 2012 and the pertinent portion of which is codified at Civil Code § 4740(a) and read as follows: [a]n owner of a separate interest in a common interest development shall not be subject to a provision in a governing document or an amendment to a governing document that prohibits the rental or leasing of any of the separate interests in that common interest development

  • Hearing

    Jul 11, 2019

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Contract - Other

ARROWOOD MASTER ASSOCIATION VS ZURAWSKI

Zuraswki further argues that the "Community Guidelines" are unenforceable against him because, under the Davis-Sterling Act, which became effective in 2012 and the pertinent portion of which is codified at Civil Code § 4740(a) and read as follows: [a]n owner of a separate interest in a common interest development shall not be subject to a provision in a governing document or an amendment to a governing document that prohibits the rental or leasing of any of the separate interests in that common interest development

  • Hearing

    Jul 11, 2019

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Contract - Other

ARROWOOD MASTER ASSOCIATION VS ZURAWSKI

Zuraswki further argues that the "Community Guidelines" are unenforceable against him because, under the Davis-Sterling Act, which became effective in 2012 and the pertinent portion of which is codified at Civil Code § 4740(a) and read as follows: [a]n owner of a separate interest in a common interest development shall not be subject to a provision in a governing document or an amendment to a governing document that prohibits the rental or leasing of any of the separate interests in that common interest development

  • Hearing

    Jul 11, 2019

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Contract - Other

ARROWOOD MASTER ASSOCIATION VS ZURAWSKI

Zuraswki further argues that the "Community Guidelines" are unenforceable against him because, under the Davis-Sterling Act, which became effective in 2012 and the pertinent portion of which is codified at Civil Code § 4740(a) and read as follows: [a]n owner of a separate interest in a common interest development shall not be subject to a provision in a governing document or an amendment to a governing document that prohibits the rental or leasing of any of the separate interests in that common interest development

  • Hearing

    Jul 11, 2019

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Contract - Other

ARROWOOD MASTER ASSOCIATION VS ZURAWSKI

Zuraswki further argues that the "Community Guidelines" are unenforceable against him because, under the Davis-Sterling Act, which became effective in 2012 and the pertinent portion of which is codified at Civil Code § 4740(a) and read as follows: [a]n owner of a separate interest in a common interest development shall not be subject to a provision in a governing document or an amendment to a governing document that prohibits the rental or leasing of any of the separate interests in that common interest development

  • Hearing

    Jul 11, 2019

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Contract - Other

ARROWOOD MASTER ASSOCIATION VS ZURAWSKI

Zuraswki further argues that the "Community Guidelines" are unenforceable against him because, under the Davis-Sterling Act, which became effective in 2012 and the pertinent portion of which is codified at Civil Code § 4740(a) and read as follows: [a]n owner of a separate interest in a common interest development shall not be subject to a provision in a governing document or an amendment to a governing document that prohibits the rental or leasing of any of the separate interests in that common interest development

  • Hearing

    Jul 11, 2019

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Contract - Other

ARROWOOD MASTER ASSOCIATION VS ZURAWSKI

Zuraswki further argues that the "Community Guidelines" are unenforceable against him because, under the Davis-Sterling Act, which became effective in 2012 and the pertinent portion of which is codified at Civil Code § 4740(a) and read as follows: [a]n owner of a separate interest in a common interest development shall not be subject to a provision in a governing document or an amendment to a governing document that prohibits the rental or leasing of any of the separate interests in that common interest development

  • Hearing

    Jul 11, 2019

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Contract - Other

RAMP PROPERTIES, INC, ET AL. VS BRIAN O'NEAL, ET AL.

Provisions in the Davis-Sterling Common Interest Development Act (Civil Code, §4000 et seq.) provide a statutory basis for declaratory and equitable relief. For example, Civil Code, §4955 states that a member of an association may bring a civil action for declaratory or equitable relief for violating Chapter 6, Article 2 (Board Meeting) from §§4900 to 4955.

  • Hearing

    Jun 21, 2019

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

BRECKENRIDGE PROPERTY FUND VS WILLIAMSON

The fact that the Davis Sterling Act includes the additional requirement that the NOD must be personally served indicates an intent to ensure notice. Accordingly, Williamson has stated sufficient facts to constitute a cause of action for wrongful foreclosure. SBS argues that any irregularity in the recording or service of the NOD is protected by the litigation privilege pursuant to Cal. Civ.

  • Hearing

    Feb 11, 2019

IN THE MATTER OF: LAS MONTANAS HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC.

Update the Declaration “so as to reflect the numerous changes and additions in the Davis-Sterling Common Interest Development Act since the original Declaration was recorded in 1981.” Reduce the percentage of members which must vote to approve future amendments to the CCRS from 75% to a simple majority and To clarify the maintenance and repair responsibilities between owners and the Association.

  • Hearing

    Nov 20, 2018

  • Type

    Other

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

1 2 3     last » 

For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.

Please wait a moment while we gather your results.