|
|
|
Date
|
Plaintiff - Defendant
|
Case Number
|
State
|
|
May 30, 2002
|
Silver Townhouses Association v.
Homeowner
|
cv
|
New Mexico
|
|
|
|
April 18, 2002
|
GENEVA BROOKS d/b/a COMMITTEE TO REMOVE THE BOARD v.
NORTHGLEN ASSOCIATION
|
06-01-00028-CV - Geneva Brooks v Northglen Associaition
|
Texas
|
|
|
|
January 03, 2000
|
Steve Thomas Solcich v.
Huntington Village Community Association
|
999-45796 - Steve Thomas Solcich v Huntington Village Community Association
|
Texas
|
|
|
|
March 01, 1994
|
Federal Trade Commission v.
Community Associations Institute
|
FTC File No. 931 0085 FTC v Community Associations Institute
|
Federal
|
|
|
|
May 28, 2002
|
Jesus F. Martinez v.
The Colony at California Oaks
|
RIC 320419 - Jesus F. Martinez v The Colony at California Oaks
|
California
|
|
|
|
August 02, 2002
|
Richard Lee Colonel v.
Melrose Area Property Owners' Association
William Rue Gregg
Maureen Meyerson
Carl Schlick
Julie Schlick
Larry Collins
Antonio Toscano
Yolando Tascano
Jerry Blankenship
Lindsey Rivers
Stanley Ostrowski
Constance Ostrowski
Dolores Knauff
Afton Roberts
Kimberly Capozzi
Robert Capozzi
PAUL MacReynolds
Terrance Wilmotte
|
02-57-CA- Colonel v Melrose Area Property Owners Assoc
|
Florida
|
|
|
|
July 25, 2002
|
. v.
.
|
NC Appeals Court, Case NO. COA01-661
|
North Carolina
|
|
|
|
November 02, 2002
|
EVA SANCHEZ v.
Desert Crest Community Association
|
CASE NO. INC 021408 - Eva Sanchez v Desert Crest Community Association
|
California
|
|
|
|
February 24, 2002
|
GREENBROOK FOUNTAIN VALLEY HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION v.
WILLIAM MARTIN TEZAK AND ANICE JEAN TEZAK
|
02CC12362 - Greenbrook Fountain Valley HOA vs Tezak
|
California
|
|
|
|
July 23, 1997
|
JARRETT E. THIES AND JACQUELYN D. THIES v.
The Law Offices of William A. Wyman ("Wyman") and Champs/The Kelly Group ("Kelly")
|
CIVIL 97-0734 B (CGA) - Thies vs Wyman
|
California
|
|
|
|
December 12, 2002
|
Homeowner v.
Directors Jerry Schmitz
|
CV-02-610
|
Arizona
|
|
|
|
April 21, 2003
|
Homeowner v.
Scott Coghlin
|
02-3986-02-3986 - Homeowner v Coghlin, Saxon, Cravens -Woodside Owners Asso
|
Texas
|
|
|
|
March 15, 2002
|
Trabuco Highlands Community Assn. v.
Nancy Head et al..
|
G027697 - Trabuco vs Head
|
California
|
|
|
|
December 10, 2002
|
Homeowners v.
The Fairways Homeowners Association
|
INC 029330 - Homeowner v Fairways HOA
|
California
|
|
|
|
June 04, 2002
|
Sunstone I Homeowners Association v.
Dawyn S Smith
|
CN03-00935RB - Sunstone I HOA v Smith
|
Arizona
|
|
|
|
August 15, 1997
|
TSG Independant Property Management v.
Marie Walsh
|
775223 - TSG Management t vs Walsh (Hidden Ridge Board Member)
|
California
|
|
|
|
November 22, 2002
|
Forest Lynn Homeowners Association v.
Eric & Anne Ripley
|
022094102 - Forest Lynn Homeowners Association v Ripley
|
Washington
|
|
|
|
April 10, 2003
|
Jacob F. Ramon v.
Tanglewood Trials Homeowners Association
|
E030386 (Superior Court No. VCV08649) - Ramon v Tanglewood Trials HOA
|
California
|
|
|
|
June 09, 1998
|
Andrew Ladick - Appellant (Homeowner - Rancho Santa Margarita Recreation and Landscape Corporation v.
Gerald J. Van Gemert
|
97-1147 (Published)
|
Federal
|
|
|
|
October 02, 1998
|
Law Offices of Gerald J. Van Gemert - Petitioner to U.S. Supreme Court v.
Andrew Ladick - (Homeowner - Rancho Santa Margarita Recreation and Landscape Corporation
San Clemente California)
|
Writ of Certiorari - Supreme Court United States
|
Federal
|
|
THE U.S. SUPREME COURT DENIED THIS CERTIORARI
|
|
December 24, 1992
|
The Coast Homeowners Association v.
James E. Cooper
|
02CC00365 - The Coast Homeowners Association vs Cooper,Saba, Campbell, Rage
|
California
|
|
|
|
February 07, 2003
|
The Coast Homeowners Association v.
James E. Cooper
|
02CC00365 Motion - Coast HOA v Cooper, Campbell, Rager, Folson
|
California
|
|
|
|
June 01, 1999
|
Paladin Group v.
City of Murrieta
|
Unknown
|
California
|
|
|
|
February 12, 2001
|
COMMITTEE FOR A BETTER TWIN RIVERS (CBTR) v.
TWIN RIVERS HOMEOWNERS' ASSOCIATION (TRHA); TWIN RIVERS COMMUNITY TRUST
|
DOCKET NO. C-121-2000 - Committee for a Better Twin Rivers RIVERS v Twin R
|
New Jersey
|
|
This case is still in the discovery phase (5/13/2003).
(Update from by Nancy Levy)
|
|
February 02, 2002
|
GENEVA BROOKS D/B/A COMMITTEE TO REMOVE THE BOARD v.
Northglen Association
|
02-0492 - Geneva Brooks
|
Texas
|
|
On May 26, 2003 David Kahne, Atttorney representing Geneva Brooks wrote:
"After the decision by the Court of Appeals, we filed a petition for review by the Supreme Court, and so did the Association. The Supreme Court asked for full briefs on the merits, which we provided. The Supreme Court has not yet said when it will hold oral argument. I expect some time in the fall."
-
|
|
January 02, 1978
|
Allied Structural Steel Co. v.
Spannaus
|
Citation: 438 U.S. 234 (1978)
|
Federal
|
|
|
|
April 18, 2003
|
Melissa Colburn v.
Villas at Eastlake Shores Owners Association
|
GIS11535 - Colburn vs Eastlake Shores, Peters & Freedman, Carlos Sosa
|
California
|
|
|
|
May 03, 2003
|
Robin Ellen Meyers v.
Victoria Woods Homeowners
|
2003 CA 006328 AB
|
Florida
|
|
|
|
October 01, 2002
|
Kathleen Chamberlain v.
Las Casitas Condo Association
|
CV 2002-00550
|
Arizona
|
|
Case is scheduled for arbitration July 23, 2003
|
|
May 22, 2003
|
Larry A. Decker and Rosanne E. Decker v.
Stoneridge Property Owners Association
|
CV-03-00722 -Decker v Stoneridge Property Owners Association
|
Idaho
|
|
Complete Case History - CV-2003-0000722
First Judicial District Court – Bonner County
Complete Case History
CV-2003-0000722
Larry A. Decker, etal. vs. Stoneridge Property Owners Association Inc.
Hearings
From To Judge Type 2/23/2004 09:00 AM 2/27/2004 05:00 PM Verby, Steve Court Trial
Register of Actions
05/22/2003 NEWC New Case Filed
Civil Complaint, More Than $1000, No prior
Appearance
PETN Petition For Declaratoy Judgment
MISC Complaint For Injunction And Damages
SMIS Summons Issued
06/09/2003 MOTN Motion To Dismiss-p. Daugharty For Def's
No Prior Appearance
NOFH Notice of Hearing
HRSC Hearing Scheduled - To Dismiss
(06/25/2003)
06/23/2003 NOTC Notice of Withdrawal of Motion To Dismiss
HRVC Hearing Vacated – To Dismiss
07/08/2003 SMRT Summons Returned
AFFD Affidavit on Return of Service - Larry
Cunningham,Registered Agent
MISC For Stoneridge Property Owners 05/24/03
NOTC Notice Of Intent To Apply For Entry of Default
MISC Judgment
07/17/2003 ANSW Def's Answer To Petition For Declaratory Jdmt;
MISC Complaint For Injunction & Damages
7/30/2003 HRSC Hearing Scheduled (Status 9-10-2003 01:50 PM)
Notice of Hearing 9/10/2003 CTLG Hearing result for Status held on 09/10/2003
01:50 PM: Court Log - #03-775
INHD Hearing result for Status held on 9/10/2003
01:50 PM: Interim Hearing Held
10/30/2003 HRSC Hearing Scheduled (Court Trial 02/23/2004
09:00 AM)—5 day court trial
11/03/2003 HRSC Hearing Scheduled (Motion 12/31/2003 09:00 AM)
NOFH Notice of Hearing
11/03/2003 MOTN Motion To Bifurcate Proceedings
11/03/2003 MOTN Motion To Amend Pleadings
|
|
March 18, 2002
|
KARL AUERBACH v.
INTERNET CORPORATION FOR ASSIGNED NAMES AND NUMBERS
|
BS 074771
|
California
|
|
The plaintiff prevailed in his case on August 5, 2002.
|
|
October 30, 2000
|
OSCA Development Company v.
RONALD W. BLEHM
|
INC019869 - OSCA Development v Blehm, Cottom et al
|
California
|
|
Defendants prevailed and were awarded $24,600 in attorney's fees on 12/18/2002.
Plaintiffs have appealed the court's decision. See CASE NO. E032843
HEARING RE: MOTION TO FIX ATTORNEY FEES SHIRLEY COTTOM
12/18/2002 - 8:30 AM DEPT. 2F
HONORABLE CHARLES E. STAFFORD , PRESIDING
CLERK: B. WILLEFORD
COURT REPORTER: T. RUNYON
OSCA DEVELOPMENT COMPANY REPRESENTED BY/IN STEVEN NAPOLES (APPEARS TELEPHONICALLY)
RONALD W. BLEHM , DENNIS W. BLEHM , JEAN CHACANACA , KEITH COTTOM , SHIRLEY COTTOM , MAX G. LUDVIGSON , LORENE E. LUDVIGSON REPRESENTED BY/IN MICHAEL ZITOMER
KEITH AND SHIRLEY COTTOM (APPEAR TELEPHONICALLY) PRESENT
EVIDENTIARY OBJECTIONS ARE OVERRULED
COURT FINDS REQUEST TO FIX ATTORNEY FEES BY THE MOVING PARTY APPEAR TO BE REASONABLE AND
NECESSARY. THE COURT FIXES ATTORNEY FEES IN THE AMOUNT OF $24600.00.
AMENDED JUDGMENT TO BE PREPARED AND SUBMITTED BY MICHAEL ZITOMER
|
|
December 09, 2002
|
OSCA Development Company v.
Ronald W. Blehm et al
|
E032843 - OSCA Development v Ronal Blehm et al
|
California
|
|
Pending
|
|
December 16, 2002
|
RONALD BLEHM et al v.
OSCA DEVELOPMENT et al
DESERT CREST COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION
|
INC033011 - Ronald Blehm v Desert Crest Community Association , OSCA Develo
|
California
|
|
PENDING
|
|
July 26, 1999
|
James Foley v.
Osborne Court Condominium
|
C.A. No. 96-360 - Foley vs Osborne Court Condominium
|
Rhode Island
|
|
|
|
July 25, 2005
|
Paula J. Frickey v.
Glendale Farms Homeowners Association
|
Civil Action No. 05-C-60 - Frickey v Glendale Farms Homeowners Association
|
West Virginia
|
|
|
|
February 10, 2003
|
REGENCY PALMS HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION v.
ARTHUR HALE; et al.
|
INC034015
|
California
|
|
ARBITRATION ORDERED.
|
|
February 13, 2003
|
SUMMERBREEZE TOWNHOMES HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION v.
ROBERT HERNANDEZ GARCIA
|
INC034086
|
California
|
|
CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE SCHEDULED FOR 7/28/03, 8:30 AM, DEPT. 2J
|
|
July 23, 2003
|
FRANK PARTNOY v.
KEVIN SHELLEY
|
03CV1460
|
California
|
|
IV. CONCLUSION
"Plaintiff's motion for judgment on the pleadings is GRANTED. The Court holds that California Elections Code section 11382 is unconstitutional. Furthermore, the Court finds that the Plaintiffs have made the requisite showing for a permanent injunction, namely that they have demonstrated (1) the likelihood of substantial and immediate irreparable injury, and (2) the inadequacy of rememdies at law."
The Plaintiff's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings was granted on July 29, 2003.
|
|
March 25, 1995
|
The Guttenberg Taxpayers and Rentpayers Associaton v.
Galaxy Towers Condominium Association
|
C-48-94 - The Guttenberg Taxpayers and Rentpayers Associaton v Galaxy Tower
|
Federal
|
|
|
|
May 30, 2002
|
Homeowner v.
The Fairways Homeowners Association
|
INC 029330 - Homeowners v Fairways HOA - Case 1
|
California
|
|
Judge Fry stated overrule as to libel, but undecided as to slander.
|
|
March 13, 2003
|
THE STATE BAR OF CALIFORNIA v.
DAMIAN S. TREVOR
|
02-O-13107, 02-O-13108, 02-)-13416
|
California
|
|
All three attorneys were disbarred.
|
|
January 28, 2002
|
Name Withheld v.
Edgewater Isle Homeowners Association
|
CIV420339 - Edgewater Isle Homeowners Association, Pelican Management Group
|
California
|
|
Suit was settled out of court by Association's insurance carrier.
|
|
February 07, 1997
|
George W. Harder v.
Desert Breezes HOA
|
95-10486 - AP 96-91030-George Harder v David Peters, Carlos Sosa, Desert Br
|
New York
|
|
|
|
October 14, 2003
|
OSCA Development Company v.
Ronald W. Blehm et al (Desert Crest Hoeowners Association)
|
EO32843 - Appellate Ruling - OSCA development v Ronald Blehm
|
California
|
|
Riverside appellate judges J. Gaut, P. J. Ramirez and J. Hollenhorst ruled against the homeowners and for the private club owner.
|
|
October 16, 2003
|
Jesus F. Martinez v.
Alexandria C. Phillips
|
RIC 386644 - Jesus Martinez v Alexandria C. Philips
|
California
|
|
Update: October 7, 2004
Case Martinez vs Alexandria Phillips is set for January 3rd, 2005
|
|
March 07, 2003
|
Lost Mountain Homeowners Association v.
J. Andrew Rice
|
02-1-04560-42 Lost Mountain Homeowners Association vs Rice
|
Georgia
|
|
The Judge ruled the fence must come down and we must pay the plaintiffs legal fees, in excess of $34,000.
She also ruled the two non-existant entities are the proper parties, in direct contradiction with the evidence, the facts, and the admissions by the plaintiffs themselves.
She ruled the fence is in violation of County Code, despite the fact it wasn't an allegation in the suit at the time of trial. This is also contrary to the evidence the County inspected the fence no less than 17 times with no violation found.
This is also in contrast to the head of Cobb County Community Development, who handles all zoning issues, testifying there is no violation. We are currently in the appeal process.
See attachment for greater detail on the major issues.
|
|
August 18, 2003
|
Pembroke Isles Homeowners Association v.
Hortensia Rodon et al
|
02-6775(02)- Pembroke Isles HOA vs Hortensia Rodon
|
Florida
|
|
|
|
August 26, 2003
|
JOHN W. SHAMROCK et al... v.
WAGON WHEEL PARK HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION
|
1 CA-CV 02=0403 - Shamrock v Wagon Wheel Park HOA
|
Arizona
|
|
|
|
November 06, 2003
|
ELVIRA MAY STANTON et al v.
NORTH HILLS PROPERTY OWNERS'
ASSCOIATION
|
CIV 01-0380 BB/ACT ACE - STANTON v NORTH HILLS POA
|
New Mexico
|
|
|
|
October 17, 2003
|
Bruce & Wendie Johnson v.
Heritage Lake Property Owners Association
|
67001 0310PL306 - Johnson v Heritage Lake Property Owners Association
|
Indiana
|
|
At this point the POA has asked for a 30 day extention to respond. No court date has been set. The POA has until 12/13/03 to answer.
|
|
January 19, 1996
|
Hilltop Village Owners Association v.
Information Withheld
|
C9502553 - Hilltop Village Owners Association v Homeowner
|
California
|
|
Judgement for the plaintiff. Defendant was ordered to lower the fence and obtain plaintiff's approval within 60 days.
|
|
May 02, 1978
|
Edmund C. MONELL v.
GOLFVIEW ROAD ASSOCIATION
|
76-1918 - Edmund C. Monell v Golfview Road Association
|
Florida
|
|
Proceeding was brought to require homeowners' association to remove four speed bumps constructed on a private road by the association over plaintiff homeowner's objections. The Circuit Court for Palm Beach County, Culver Smith, J., entered final judgment denying request for mandatory injunction, and homeowner appealed.
The District Court of Appeal, Beranek, John R., Associate Judge, held that in light of uncontroverted evidence that right of homeowner, who had same right to road as all other homeowners in association, to easement over private road was substantially diminished by speed bumps, injunction requiring removal of speed bumps should have been granted.
|
|
March 15, 1989
|
NORMANDY B. CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION and Sol Gordon v.
NORMANDY C. ASSOCIATION
|
87-2655 - Sol Gordon v Normandy Condominium Association
|
Florida
|
|
|
|
September 23, 2003
|
Fox Hills West Citizen's Association v.
Frederic P. McCann
- Maryland
|
246125-V - Fox Hills West Citizen's Association v McCann
|
Maryland
|
|
|
|
February 18, 2003
|
Pointe Mountainside Golf Community Association v.
Monta L. Redd
- Arizona
|
CV2003-003205 - Pointe Mountainside Golf Community Association v Gammage et
|
Arizona
|
|
|
|
February 18, 2003
|
Pointe Mountainside Golf Community Association v.
Monta L. Redd
|
CV2003-003205 - Pointe Mountainside Golf v Monte Redd - Duplicate entry
|
Arizona
|
|
|
|
January 28, 2004
|
Karen Brown v.
Board of Directors - Mesa Madrid Townhomes
c/o Jomar Association Services
Mesa
|
CV03-07257SC Karen Brown vs Mesa Madrid Townhomes
|
Arizona
|
|
|
|
October 30, 1998
|
ROBERT S. CUNNINGHAM v.
THE SUPERIOR COURT OF ORANGE COUNTY
|
G021233 - Fountain Valley Chateau Blanc v Dept of Veterans & Cunningham
|
California
|
|
Court data last updated: 01/23/2004 02:53 PM
Docket Entries (Register of Actions)
Date Description Notes
12/09/1998 Petition for review filed RPI Fountain Valley Chateau Blanc Etc. Records requested.
12/15/1998 Received: CA Record in G021233 - two Blue Doghouses CA Record in G021948 - one Manila Jacket and Loose briefs
12/29/1998 Answer to petition for review filed Petnr Robert S. Cunningham
12/29/1998 Request for depublication (petition for review pending) RPI Fountain Valley Chateau Blanc Management
01/08/1999 Filed: Joinder/Non-Pty Martin, Wilson & Macdowell Reqt for Depublication Joining in Depub of Fountain Valley
01/08/1999 Opposition filed Response/joinder to Reqt for Depublication Neuland & Nordberg [Non-Party]
01/11/1999 Received: Late joinder/Reqt for Depub Feldsott Lee & Feinbert/Non-Pty
01/15/1999 Received: Response/joinder to Reqt for Depublication--Late Knopfler & Robertson [Non-Party]
01/27/1999 Petition for review & depublication request denied Kennard,J Is of the opinion Petn should be granted
|
|
August 07, 2002
|
Villa De Las Palmas Homeowners' Association v.
Paula Terifaj
|
S109123 - Villa De Las Palmas HOA v Terifaj
|
California
|
|
Review - Civil Appeal Start Date: 08/07/2002
Case Status: fully briefed
Court data last updated: 01/28/2004 08:53 AM
Supreme Court Case: S109123
Trial Court Case: INC13318
Court of Appeal Case: E029449
Supreme Court Case: S109123
Division: 2
Case Caption: Villa De Las Palmas Homeowners Assoc. v.
Case Type: Civil
Filing Date: 04/24/2001
|
|
January 29, 2004
|
Avalon Master Homeowner Association v.
James A. Jones and Christopher Minters
|
03-18902 CACE 12 - Avalon Master v Jones & Minters
|
Florida
|
|
See www.chargeavalon.org for case updates
|
|
August 08, 2003
|
Velda Rose Estates Homeowners Association v.
Robert Louis Nelms
|
CV 2003-010051 Velda Rose Estates HOA v Robert L. Nelms
|
Arizona
|
|
|
|
February 24, 2004
|
JOHN W. BROWN v.
ST. LUCIE WEST SERVICES DISTRICT AND ISLE OF CAPRI NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION
|
04 CA 000281 (OC) - Brown v St Lucie West & Isle of Capri Association
|
Florida
|
|
Pending, case filed 2/24/04
|
|
January 22, 2004
|
Rancho Santa Fe Association v.
Patricia Dolan-Kng
|
D040637/D041486 (Superior Court GIN005057)Rancho Sante Fe v Dolan-King
|
California
|
|
Judgement to plaintiff in the amount $318,293,50 plus costs on appeal.
|
|
February 26, 2004
|
Kimberley Cane v.
Edgewater Isle Homeowners Association
|
SCC-101569 - Kimberley Cane v Edgewater Isle Homeowners Association
|
California
|
|
Judgment for Plaintiff, against Association, for $250 plus costs.
|
|
December 12, 2002
|
Brook Hills HOA & Cross-Complaintant Bass v.
Bass & Cross defendants :John Nilsson
|
GIN 026443 Brook Hills HOA v Bass & Bass v Brooks Hills.Peters
|
California
|
|
Judge ruled for Brook Hills Homeowners Association on February 17, 2005. Michael Kim and David Peters of Peters & Freedman asked for $123,019 in lawyers fees. Judge gave them $82,525.50 stating:
Plaintiff's request for an award of fees in the amount of $123,019.00 is denied as unreasonable. This amount includes fees not requested or mentioned in the moving papers, but only raised for the first time in the reply; fees for excessive interoffice attorney conferences, unnecessary and duplicative trial work; charges unrelated to Plaintiff; charges unrelated to this action; charges for work performed on behalf of other cross-defendants and for which Plaintiff counsel was reimbursed, and charges which should have been sought much earlier in this lawsuit, per CCP 425.16(j), CRC 2(f), and CRC 870.2(b)(1).
Basses have the option of appealing this ruling.
|
|
March 09, 2004
|
Changebridge at Montville Condominium Association v.
John F. Gambal
|
A-002750-02T3 - Changebridge at Montville Assoc v Gambal
|
New Jersey
|
|
Listed above
|
|
February 04, 2000
|
Alsatian Heights Homeowners Association Inc. v.
Irene Britton
|
00-02-15035CV - Alsation Heights HOA vs Irene Britton
|
Texas
|
|
Agreed Judgment
Set aside the filed document.
No monetary damages.
No Judgment against me by the HOA or The Developer.
|
|
May 29, 2004
|
Chestnut Hill Plantation Homeowners' Association v.
Todd Whatley
|
04CP402079 - Chestnut Hill Plantation vs Todd Whatley
|
South Carolina
|
|
30 days to answer... pending and investigating
|
|
December 26, 2002
|
Villa Encino Homeowners Association v.
Ruth Goodman
|
LC063435 - Villa Encino Homeowners Association vs Ruth Goodman, Betty Solo
|
California
|
|
Mr. Harmon is no longer president after selling his unit in February, 2004 and does not reside in the complex and the VEHOA's attorney is still representing him so he does not have to pay his own attorney fees.
TRIAL BEGINS JUNE 7, 2004.
|
|
July 31, 2004
|
Sheridan Hils South Homeowners Association v.
Paul and Katie Plohocky
|
CJ-2003-5418 Sheridan Hils South Homeowners Association v Plohocky
|
Oklahoma
|
|
|
|
June 23, 2004
|
Benjamin Gatti v.
Village of Lake Park
|
3:04CV285 - Gatti vs. Village of Lake Park -
|
North Carolina
|
|
Filed Yesturday (June 14th, 2004)
Motion of Temporary Restraining Order pending
|
|
April 14, 2000
|
Matthew P. Brown v.
Information Withheld
|
00-1683 - Matthew Brown vs Homeowner
|
Virginia
|
|
This case to this date is still pending.
The lawyer for the Plaintiff has up to this time asked the defendants to submit three different sets of interrogatories, but has not asked for a court date for the case to be heard.
• This case has been non-suited. Therefore no more action is required by defendant. They have only been caused much hardship by the overbearing board member. - August 7, 2004 Update
|
|
July 12, 2004
|
Windmere Homeowners Association v.
Information Withheld
|
76 EQ 2002 - Windmere Homeowners Association v Homeowner
|
Pennsylvania
|
|
As of June 7, 2004, Defendant's Petition to Amend Answer with New Matter is granted; Defendant's Motion to Join Additional Defendants is denied; Plaintiff's Motion for Protective Order is granted with respect to financial records, handwritten notes and handwritten minutes, but denied with respect to interrogatories. More depositions to follow. Then admissions, etc. to trial.
Plaintiffs are also playing at mediation to buy time until they collect another round of annual dues (2005) as they are hurting financially.
|
|
June 14, 2004
|
Villa de Las Palmas Homeowners Association v.
Paula Terifaj
|
S109123 I Villa de Las Palmas vs Paula Terifaj
|
California
|
|
|
|
May 14, 2004
|
The HOA board members at Montclair at Lomas Del Lago Estates HOA at the time of the complaint are:Herb Sorensen v.
Larry & Kathryn Demry
|
GIN033026 - Montclair at Lomas Del Lago Estates HOA v Larry & Kathryn D
|
California
|
|
On May 6, 2004 Hon. Lisa Guy-Schall held a telephone conference with the attorney for the plaintiffs, Mary Goodhue Deutsch, and the attorney for the defendants, Jeffrey Bloom. The results of this telephone hearing were unacceptable to Ms. Deutsch and she requested an oral hearing held on May 14, 2004, with the exact same results:
The following is a TENTATIVE, ruling for 5/6/2004,
Department 31, the Honorable Lisa Guy-Schall presiding.
Case Number GIN033026
MONTCLAIR AT LOMAS DEL LAGO ESTATES HOMEOWNERS vs
LARRY DEMRY
Plaintiff Montclair At Lomas Del Lago Estates Homeowners Association's Motion for Attorneys Fees Re: Application for Preliminary Injunction is denied without prejudice, as premature. This case has not been adjudicated on the merits. Whether or not there is a prevailing party who may be entitled to attorneys fees pursuant to Civil Code Section 1354 has not been determined.
Defendants Larry Demry and Kathryn Demry's request for an award of sanctions pursuant to CCP Section 128.6 is denied. Defendants have failed to establish any bad faith conduct on the part of the Association that warrants the imposition of sanctions under CCP Section 128.6.
Defendants Larry Demry and Kathryn Demry's request for an award of sanctions pursuant to CCP Section 128.7 is denied. Defendants have failed to comply with the technical and procedural requirements of CCP Section 128.7 motion.
Plaintiff Montclair At Lomas Del Lago Estates Homeowners Association is ordered to serve notice of this Ruling on all parties to this action with 24 hours of the date of this Ruling.
If parties wish to orally argue this motion they are required to contact the Court at (760) 806-6350 no later than Monday, May 10, 2004, 3:00pm. Issues for oral argument must be submitted in writing by Tuesday, May 11, 2004, 4:30pm. The party requesting oral argument is required to notify opposing parties and will be required to file a declaration proving notice given. If oral argument is requested, it will be heard on Friday, May 14, 2004 at 1:30pm. If oral argument is not requested, this ruling will become the final order of the Court as of the date of this tentative ruling.
|
|
July 13, 2004
|
Andrew R. Brooks; Pro Se v.
Charter Point Community Association
|
04CC00606 Andrew R. Brooks v Charter Point Community Association, Inc., Co
|
California
|
|
|
|
August 12, 2004
|
Information Withheld v.
Diane Hall
|
CV-0000332-04 - Homeowners vs Clearview Manor Townhouse Association,
|
Pennsylvania
|
|
WAITING FOR HEARING.
|
|
October 21, 2004
|
Wagon Wheel Park HomeOwners Association v.
Larry Romo
|
S-0900-CV-20040040 - Wagon Wheet HOA vs Larry Romo plus 7 others
|
Arizona
|
|
|
|
August 12, 2004
|
Information withheld.
|
Dana Vista HOA vs Jill M. Ferguson et al
|
California
|
|
|
|
October 01, 2004
|
Billy Baskett and George Zelinski v.
Cypress Creek Homeowners Association with named individuals of Rodney Schwalbach
|
04-867-C277 - Baskett and Zelinski vs Cypress Creek HOA & BOD
|
Texas
|
|
|
|
July 09, 2003
|
Wintergreen Property Owner's Association (WPOA) v.
Dennis L. Day
|
125CH03000068-00 - Wintergreen Property Owners Assoc. v Day
|
Virginia
|
|
No court appearance requested by the plaintiff's attorney.
|
|
August 12, 2004
|
Dana Vista Homeowners Association v.
Information Withheld
|
04CC08552 - Dana Vista HOA vs Homeowner
|
California
|
|
No court date has been set as of yet.
|
|
July 16, 2004
|
Information Withheld v.
Dana Vista Homeowners Association
|
04SS01267 - Homeowner vs Dana Vista HOA
|
California
|
|
Three individual owners of this complex went into court the same day with the same complaint. We each had numerous documents to present as evidence, we had a copies of the Civil Codes the HOA was in violation of, and provided copies of the court records of previous homeowners who had won their cases in the same type of action.
It was clear to us the minute we began to speak on our behalf that JUDGE MICHAEL S. MCCARTIN had his mind made up in favor of the HOA! No matter what we said, or what evidence we presented he exhibited the attitude that we were wasting the courts time. He said he would review our exhibits and notify us by mail of his decision. He ruled in favor of the HOA with absolutely no reason given for his decision!
|
|
October 21, 2004
|
Melvin Mogul v.
Tropical Trailer Gardens LLC and Wesley Cox
|
50 2004 CA 009880 MB - Mogul, Phillips, Henderson v Tropical Trailer Garden
|
Florida
|
|
|
|
November 03, 2003
|
Chandur Gulrajaney v.
Information Withheld
|
HUD-L-2523-02 - Chandur Gulrajaney vs homeowners
|
New Jersey
|
|
The case was dismissed in favor of the 5 Defendants however the plaintiff has appealled Judge D"Italia's decision to the Superior Court of New Jersey where the appeal is currently under review.
|
|
September 26, 2003
|
Lorraine Krestian v.
Marni Temple-Miller - Karen A Wargo
|
RSC03-0974 and RSC03-0990 - Krestian vs Temple-Miller , Wargo
|
California
|
|
|
|
September 25, 2001
|
United States of America v.
Diane Caroline Fullerton
|
SA CR 01-Mag 01-0169-M-LRL USA v Fullerton,Reeder,Hastey
|
California
|
|
The case goes to trial on January 3, 2004 in the Santa Ana Federal District Courthouse
Diane Caroline Fullerton entered a plea of guilty. Sentencing hearing for Fullerton is scheduled for February 7, 2004 at 2;30 pm in Santa Ana Federal District Courthouse..
|
|
January 20, 2004
|
Greenbrook Fountain Valley Homeowners Association v.
William Martin Tezak
|
G032358 - Greenbrook Fountain Valley HOA vs Tezak
|
California
|
|
Homeowner paid $47,000 in attorney fees, costs and interests to the Greenbrook Fountain Valley Homeowners Association.
|
|
March 22, 2004
|
Ramsey Agan v.
Katzman & Korr
|
03-62145-CIV - Agan, Spies vs Katzman, Korr
|
Florida
|
|
|
|
January 21, 2005
|
William Tezak v.
Class action: Tom Summers et all -148 homeowners in Greenbrook Fountain Valley Homeowners Association and Does 1-500
|
05CC00011 - Class Action - Tezak vs Greenbrook Homeowners Association
|
California
|
|
|
|
December 10, 2004
|
Mark Shapiro - homeowner v.
Surfside Beach Homeowners Association
|
4ws044372 - Mark Shapiro v Surfside HOA
|
California
|
|
Judge nho Trong Nguyen ruled as thus :
The boards interpretation and reliance on provision 5.2.2. was wrong. Said interpretation contravenes the ccrs which dictates that conduct that changes the ownership interest of the common area must be approved by 75% of the homeowners of the association. The property belongs to all homeowners, ot the board nor any individual homeowner. The Board acted illegally in issuing and approving permits for the building of structures by individual homeowners on common area/common property.
It should be noted that said board in a newsletter to all homeowners said the judge was wrong and that same board was going to continue to allow homeowners to develop common area for their own use and has done so in complete defiance of the judges ruling. Another court date is scheduled for march 4, 2005 in the westminster court in front of same judge.
|
|
February 22, 2005
|
Williard Harrington v.
Paradise Pines Property Owners Assoc.
|
134342 - Harrington v Paradise POA, Allied Trustee, Hanks
|
California
|
|
|
|
March 29, 2005
|
Dennis Owens v.
Pete Berru President
|
05NS80793 - Owens v Pete Berru President Cherokee Mobile HOA
|
California
|
|
|
|
April 13, 2005
|
Cathedral City Police and City Management v.
Sharon Stephens
|
Case No: INC 0433437 -Cathedral City Police and City vs Sharon Stevens
|
California
|
|
|
|
October 15, 2005
|
Steven Hatcher v.
Villa's of Westador 1-A Owners Association Inc
|
2005-09592 - Hatcher, Johnson v Villas of Westador, Creative Mgmt
|
Texas
|
|
|
|
July 01, 2005
|
IAN A. MURPHY v.
OTTER KEY CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION
|
05004539CI - Murphy vs Otter Key Condo Association et al
|
Florida
|
|
|
|
April 14, 2005
|
Robert Williams v.
Flemington South Estates Homeowner's Association
|
HNT-L-162-05 - Williams vs Flemington South Estates HOA
|
New Jersey
|
|
Court ordered mediation on July 21, or 28 2005.
Trial pending mediation outcome.
|
|
February 15, 2005
|
The Harbours Condominium Association v.
Homeowner
|
10C01-0401-PL-033 - Harbour Condominium Association v Homeowner
|
Indiana
|
|
The Judge has handed down an order denying judgement foreclosing condomiunium lien.
The judge entered 36 numbered "Findings of Facts" and 26 numbered "Conclusions of Law. The judge concluded that the Association's calculations of late fees are arbitrary, capricious and lack any foundation either in contract, statute or law.
The judge further stated in his "Conclusion of Law" that the Harbours own calculations and actions lead to the conclusion their Declaration is arbitrary, capricious, ambiguous and the actions of the Harbours as it relates to Hudson are malicious in their intent to seize her home and force her from the building. Late fees of $4,733.46 per month supports a finding that the late fees are a penalty.
The Association Board through the attorney has requested a hearing to correct errors and is accusing the judge of re-writing the statutes.
|
|
August 29, 2005
|
Donald Chaney v.
Sun City Roseville Community Association
|
RSC 08603 - Don Chaney v Sun City Roseville Community Association
|
California
|
|
|
|
June 16, 2003
|
Evergreen Highlands Association v.
Robert A. West.
|
00CA1586-02SC242 Evergreen Highland Association v West
|
Colorado
|
|
|
|
August 16, 2004
|
CASTLEPOINTHOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION v.
DAVID C. STIVER
|
04CV3197 CASTLEPOINT HOA vs David Stiver et al
|
Colorado
|
|
This is a hearing brought by the preseumed representative of the Homeowners Association asking that the special meeting being requested by what might be called the disident group of homeowners set for tomorrow evening not be held on the grounds that the meeting has not been properly called or noticed in accordance with the bylaws.
The plaintiff has the burden of proof in that regard, because they are the ones making the claim, and the Court is not convinced that the Plaintiff has met its burden on the merits of the matter. The court finds that the call and notice were sufficient.
The Court agrees with the testimony of the expert witness, Ms. Tebedo. 4.2 say a meeting may be called by, among other things, a petition signed by 25% of the homeowners.
4.3 says notice shall be given by either the Secretary, or person authorized to call the meeting. One of the possible groups of people authorized to call a meeting is 25% of the owners.
And the Court does not believe that then requires the notice to be signed by the same 25%. The Court believes that it is sufficient to have a representative of that group sign the notice, which is what occurred in this case.
The evidence indicates that notice was mailed to everyone. That is all 4.3 requires. It doesn't require that the notice be received by everyone. It simply says that it must be mailed to everyone.
People are sometimes away on vacation, there are lots of reasons why someone might not receive the notice. But that is not what the bylaws require. They bylaws require that it be mailed to everyone, more than 15 days before the meeting. This was done.
It does adequately specify the place, day, and hour of the meeting, and the purpose of the meeting. The Court agrees with Ms. Tebedo. I can't see anything wrong with it.
The Court agrees with Ms. Tebedo that the fact that the signature line at the bottom of the call identified Ms. Moreland as "President" is beside the point. That word could have simply not been there, and it would have had the same sufficiency.
So the Court doesn't need to decide the question of whether she is or is not Presidnet, which gets me back to saying I don't need to decide whether the meeting of June the 8th was or was not properly held. The word "President" simply could have been left off the document altogether, and just signed , "Connie Moreland," and it would have been sufficient.
There was some reference to a particular Colorado Statute which wasn't otherwise identified. The Court assumes that the witness was referring to C.R.S. 7-127-102, which talks about how special meetings of non-profit corporations can be called, and the Court finds that to be inapplicable to our situation, because section 1(b) of the statute, which is the one that would have been at issue, starts out by sqaying, "Unless otherwise provided by the Bylaws". So, if the bylaws provide certain things the statute doesn't even come into play.
Furthermore, the statute talks about a 10% requirement of the members. Here the bylaws call for 2 and a half times that amount, 25%. It is simply a 25% provision, which is not applicable to our situation.
So to the extent that the statute talks about going to an officer of the corporation, and the corporation acting on it, or not acting on it, and 30 days that has to go by, in the Court's opinion, is simply inapplicable to our situation.
So the Court finds that doesn't prevent anything. So the Court sees no reason to enjoin the holding of the tomorrow night.
|
|
July 01, 2003
|
Jerone Zamos et al v.
James T. Stroud et al.
|
No. B160484 Zamos v Stroud (Superior Court No. LC060622)
|
California
|
|
|
|
October 19, 2005
|
Information withheld.
|
A-89-04 - R.M.v. Supreme Court of New Jersey, et al.
|
New Jersey
|
|
New Jersey Supreme Court Opinion" "We agree that, as written and as applied, Rule 1:20-9 violates the First Amendment because it is not narrowly tailored to serve a compelling interest. We hold that a grievant may discuss publicly the fact that he or she filed a grievance, the content of that grievance, and the result of the process. Our holding applies retroactively to all grievances currently being processed by the disciplinary system. The confidentiality of concluded matters, however, shall remain in effect."
|
|
November 04, 2005
|
Paul LeRoux v.
Nancy Burke
|
05CH18956 Paul LeRoux v. Nancy Burke
|
Illinois
|
|
Lawsuit settled
|
|
March 08, 2006
|
Information withheld.
|
05-15908-E - Homeowners v. 3801 HOA Association
|
Texas
|
|
It is 5 months into a settlement
|
|
February 06, 2006
|
Information withheld.
|
CR 21119/05- Ben Noe (V.P. Santa Barbara HOA)- vs Homeowner
|
New Mexico
|
|
We had a bond arraignment and I plead "not guilty". Court hearing set for Feb. 6th 2006. My attorney is to be filing a motion to dismiss.
|
|
March 02, 2006
|
Information withheld.
|
BC34416 - Homeowner vs lawyer
|
California
|
|
|
|
February 07, 2006
|
COMMITTEE FOR A BETTER TWIN RIVERS v.
TWIN RIVERS HOMEOWNERS' ASSOCIATION
|
A-4047-03T24047-03T2 - Appellate Opinion: Twin Rivers vs Twin Rivers Home
|
New Jersey
|
|
|
|
June 24, 2005
|
Erik Rosekrans v.
Class Harbor Association
|
0505-05342 - Erik Rosekrans vs Class Harbor Association
|
Oregon
|
|
The decision as to CHA's right to unilaterally move Rosekrans's and Counter's floating home has not yet been rendered.
|
|
February 24, 2006
|
Yan Sui v.
Michelle J. Matteau
|
05HL03448 - Yan Sui Vs. 2176 Pacific Homeowners Association, Matteau et al
|
California
|
|
|
|
March 03, 2006
|
Linda Geist Gehring v.
Las Meridas Homeowners Association; Board of Directors; Associated Asset Management Company;James Hazlewood
|
CV05-02483RB - Gehring v Las Meridas HOA, Hazelwood ...
|
Arizona
|
|
Plaintiff lost Motion for Summary Judgment
To be appealed - Defendant's legal fees $16,000 on $2,400 small claims action.
|
|
March 10, 2006
|
Information withheld.
|
Encinitas Village HOA - Peters & Freedman - AAA Arbitration
|
California
|
|
AAA Arbitration plans to allow a hearing in March 2006.
This matter has taken up three years of my life, with Peters & Freedman sending letters threatening me with a lawsuit ... when the HOA is to submit to arbitration!!!
|
|
March 04, 2005
|
Preston Highlands Homeowners Association et al v.
Dallas Housing Authority
|
04-10946 - Preston HOA v Dallas Housing Authority
|
Texas
|
|
Dallas Housing Authority's (DHA) can proceed with construction of the affordable housing at the "Hillcrest site" as planned.
|
|
December 13, 2000
|
DENNIS E. DAMON v.
OCEAN HILLS JOURNALISM CLUB
|
D034890 - Damon v. Ocean Hills Journalism Club
|
California
|
|
|
|
April 28, 2006
|
Norman Kleber v.
California Subdivision Improvemnet Association
|
06 CH 617 - Kleber et al v California Subdivision Improvement Assocication
|
Illinois
|
|
|
|
January 02, 2004
|
J. Andrew and Kathryn W. Rice v.
Ronald L. Cannon
|
04-1-00020-33 - J. Andrew and Kathryn W. Rice v Ronald L. Cannon
|
Georgia
|
|
|
|
April 13, 2006
|
The Villages of Woodland Springs Homeowners Association v.
James W Smith
|
The Villages of Woodland Springs Homeowners Association, Inc. v. James W.
|
Texas
|
|
|
|
September 15, 2005
|
Ogunquit Development LLC v.
Lake Holiday Country Club Inc
|
Chancery 05-384 - Ogunquit Development vs Lake Holiday Country Club et al
|
Virginia
|
|
Current estimate of trial is sometime in 2007.
|
|
April 26, 2006
|
GARY KENT JONES v.
LINDA K. FLOWERS ET AL.
|
547 U.S. (2006) - Jones vs Flowers
|
District of Columbia
|
|
Before a State may take property and sell it for unpaid taxes, the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment requires the government to provide the owner "notice and opportunity for hearing appropriate to the nature of the case." Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co., 339 U. S. 306, 313 (1950). We granted certiorari to determine whether, when notice of a tax sale is mailed to the owner and returned undelivered, the government must take additional reasonable steps to provide notice before taking the owner's property. CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS delivered the opinion of the Court. (See attached opinion)
|
|
May 09, 2006
|
MARK IRVING SHAPIRO v.
SURFSIDE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION
|
05CC11650 - Shapiro v Surfside HOA and Board
|
California
|
|
SURFSIDE HOA AGREED BEFORE TRIAL TO ABIDE BY CCRS AND STATE GUIDELINES WITH A LETTER OF APOLOGY TO PLAINTIFF REGARDING LAW SUIT AND CONTENTS WITHIN AND ACKNOWLEDGING THEIR WRONG DOING IN THE PAST AND DETAILING TO MEMEBERSHIP THE RULES IN COMMON AREA DEVELOPMENT PER CCRS AND STATE GUIDELINES.
|
|
May 09, 2006
|
North Canyon Ranch Owners Association v.
Stacy K. Mobbs
|
CV 2005-015360 - North County Ranch Owners v Stacy Mobbs
|
Arizona
|
|
|
|
June 14, 2006
|
Information Withheld v.
Villas Los Rios Homeowners' Association
|
366-1360-06 - Homeowner v Villas Los Rios HOA et al
|
Texas
|
|
|
|
June 07, 2006
|
Lost Mountain Homeowners Association Inc.and Architectural Control Committee of Lost Mountain Township Homeowners Association v.
J. Andrew Rice And Kathryn W. Rice
|
No. 02-1-04560-42 - Lost Mountain Homeowners Association vs Rice
|
Georgia
|
|
|
|
May 15, 2006
|
Mark Shapiro v.
Surfside Homeowner Association
|
06ws01027 - Mark Shapiro v Surfside Homeowner Association
|
California
|
|
Judge ruled that Surfside Homeowner Association was in clear violation of Civil Code (Davis Stirling Act) in not allowing plaintiff to view requested document and awarded plaintiff $590.00 including court costs as law states each request denied by a Board is $500.00 per document denied by said Board.
|
|
October 20, 2004
|
Robert Louis Armstrong v.
The Ledges Homeowners Association
|
03-CVS-1680 Armstrong et al vs Ledges HOA
|
North Carolina
|
|
The decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals can be viewed at the Court's Homepage. Case Number COA05-88 Filed October 18, 2005.
|
|
August 29, 2006
|
Homeowner v.
Newport Crest Homeowners Association
|
05HL03768 - Homeowner vs Newport Crest Homeowners Association
|
California
|
|
Discovery has been commenced.
|
|
June 23, 2006
|
Memorial Northwest Homeowners Association
vs v.
William S Lent
|
2006-22153-Memorial Northwest Homeowners Association v Lent
|
Texas
|
|
|
|
July 17, 2006
|
BERNARD AMERO v.
BAYWINDS COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION
|
50 2006 00 1456 MB AH - Homeowners vs Baywinds Community Association et al
|
Florida
|
|
|
|
February 07, 2005
|
Pocket Protectors v.
City of Sacramento
|
S130830 - Pocket Protectors v. City of Sacramento
|
California
|
|
|
|
November 04, 1999
|
Mavis Baker v.
Minister of Citizenship and Immigration - Canada
|
25823-Baker v Canada
|
Other State
|
|
Therefore, both because there was a violation of the principles of procedural fairness owing to a reasonable apprehension of bias, and because the exercise of the H & C discretion was unreasonable, I would allow this appeal. The appellant requested that solicitor-client costs be awarded to her if she were successful in her appeal. The majority of this Court held as follows in Young v. Young, [1993] 4 S.C.R. 3, at p. 134: Solicitor-client costs are generally awarded only where there has been reprehensible, scandalous or outrageous conduct on the part of one of the parties. There has been no such conduct on the part of the Minister shown during this litigation, and I do not believe that this is one of the exceptional cases where solicitor-client costs should be awarded. I would allow the appeal, and set aside the decision of Officer Caden of April 18, 1994, with party-and-party costs throughout. The matter will be returned to the Minister for redetermination by a different immigration officer.
|
|
June 14, 2006
|
THE NORTH CAROLINA HUMAN RELATIONS COMMISSION On behalf of VIRGINIA RADCLIFFE v.
DAVID HULL
|
06 CV 008627 - North Carolina Human Relations Comm vs Avenol HOA Board
|
North Carolina
|
|
|
|
October 10, 2006
|
Patrick Durso v.
Summer Brook Preserve Homeowners Associations
|
05-2006-sc-053349 - Durso v Summer Brook Preserve Homeowners Association
|
Florida
|
|
Just filed and still pending.
|
|
May 01, 2006
|
The Villages of Green Valley v.
James Richard Tyrer - Green Valley
|
C20043994 - Green Valley HOA v Tyrer
|
Arizona
|
|
Current action is my Motion for Reconsideration of what I consider to be a totally unjust decision.
|
|
August 01, 2006
|
Homeowners Associations or Homeowners v.
Homeowners Associations - Homeowners
|
Table of Ohio Condominium Cases
|
Ohio
|
|
|
|
June 10, 2002
|
Thomas and Doris Kitchen v.
Lake Lorelei Property Owners Association and Bill Wilson
|
CA2001-10-016 and CA2001-10-018 -Kitchen v Lake Lorelei Property Owners Ass
|
Ohio
|
|
|
|
January 21, 2003
|
Wedgewood Community Association Inc v.
Robert & Barbara Nash
|
02A03-0294-CV-112 - Wedgewood Community Association
|
Indiana
|
|
The appeals court judges defeated the "unclean hands" theory and made Nash pay the Wedgewood Community Association's lawyers fees.
|
|
September 05, 2006
|
POINTE ROSA HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION v.
JULIO CICCHINI
|
No. 267101 - Point Rosa HOA v Julio Ciccini
|
Michigan
|
|
|
|
January 13, 2005
|
J. Andrew (Andy) and Kathryn W. (Taffy) Rice v.
Judge Adele Grubbs
|
Cobb County Superior Court CAN 05-1-0437-18 - Rice v Judge Adele Grubbs
|
Georgia
|
|
This matter is currently (9/14/06),before the GA Supreme Court and an Oral Argument has been requested. Because of the extreme nature of this pleading along with the willful fraud by multiple members of the Court as well as Judiciary, the Rices has made this situation publicly known. Their files continue to be altered, and they have been repeatedly subject to unlawful acts by officials to include Judge Adele Grubbs, who called for their arrest, after the Rices requested a federal investigation to political corruption and judicial misconduct. Unmarked cars from Cobb and Bryan Counties appeared at the Rices home, after Judge Grubbs ordered their arrest for "Contempt" of a VOID Order issued on behalf of a dissolved corporation along with 2 corporate interests owned by the Rices, a matter on appeal before the GA Court of Appeals.
See also:
Case References Include: Civil Action Number (CAN)
CAN 02-1-04560-42 LMHA et al v. Rice et al
CAN 05-1-0437-18 Rice et al v. Grubbs (Writ of Prohib)
CAN 2006-CV-114990 Rice v. Martin (Mandamus Fulton County)
CAN 06A-02827-9 Rice v. Lawler (Mandamus Gwinnett County)
CAN 00-1-9027-28 Say & Odom v. Rice
CAN 04-1-00020-33 Rice et al v. Cannon
CAN 04-1-4350-42 Bruce Ailion v. Marla Ailion
CAN 04-1-5290-42 Marla Susan Ailion Wright v. Ailion
CAN 06-1-002727-42 Breaux Gallaher v. Gallaher
CAN 04-CV-3379 Champion v. Flying R Ranch, Inc.
(Bartow County)
CAN 05-1-4623-99 Champion v. Flying R Ranch, Inc.
(Cobb County)
CAN 1:04-CV-3214-BBM Rice et al v. Grubbs (Federal 1983 Action)
|
|
June 21, 2006
|
Information withheld.
|
06CC07649 - Yan Sui v 2176 Pacific HOA, Matteau
|
California
|
|
|
|
February 10, 2006
|
Krontz v.
City of San Diego
|
D045332 - Krontz v. City of San Diego,
|
California
|
|
|
|
September 05, 2006
|
The Villages of Green Valley Homeowners' Association v.
James Richard Tyrer
|
C20043994 - The Villages of Green Valley v James Richard Tyrer
|
Arizona
|
|
I am ordered to stucco and paint the wall by October 5, 2006 which would be impossible to do correctly in a month even if I hadn't had the usual problems obtaining the needed material to do the job.
So, this will probably go back to Court again since the Plaintiff's attorney has refused to even consider the evidence that it would take an additional 44 days.
|
|
August 16, 2006
|
ROBERT LOUIS ARMSTRONG and wife v.
THE LEDGES HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION
|
640PA05 - Armstrong v The Ledges Homeowners Association
|
North Carolina
|
|
For the reasons stated above, we conclude that the disputed amendment is invalid and unenforceable. In so doing, we echo the rationale of the Supreme Court of Nebraska in Boyles v. Hausmann, 246 Neb. 181, 191, 517 N.W.2d 610, 617 (1994): "The law will not subject a minority of landowners to unlimited and unexpected restrictions on the use of their land merely because the covenant agreement permitted a majority to make changes in existing covenants." Here, petitioners purchased their lots without notice that they would be subjected to additional restrictions on use of the lots and responsible for additional affirmative monetary obligations imposed by a homeowners' association. This Court will not permit the Association to use the Declaration's amendment provision as a vehicle for imposing a new and different set of covenants, thereby substituting a new obligation for the original bargain of the covenanting parties. Accordingly, we reverse the opinion of the North Carolina Court of Appeals and remand this case to that court for further remand to the trial court for additional proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion. REVERSED AND REMANDED.
|
|
February 27, 1997
|
The Estate of Paul K. Sherman v.
Antonio S. Almeida et al
|
No. 98-157-Appeal (PC 92-1268) Almeida v Sherman
|
Rhode Island
|
|
Although we echo the concerns of the trial justice, and stress that this Court in no way condones this appalling criminal conduct by Almeida, a member of the judiciary of this state, we must nonetheless continue to uphold the fundamental bedrock principle that our judicial officers are not liable in suit for actions taken in their judicial capacity.4 Therefore, although we in no way condone Almeida's behavior in this case, it is important to recognize that plaintiff is not without recourse, and may continue to pursue those claims made against Almeida in his personal capacity.
|
|
October 23, 2006
|
Indian Lake Estates v.
Joyce L. Loupe
|
53-2006-CA-003738-0000-WH- Indian Lakes v Joyce L. Loupe, Lois M. Hill
|
Florida
|
|
Nothing yet.
|
|
February 26, 1999
|
MICHELLE CARON v.
CHARLES E. MAXWELL and LISA MAXWELL
|
CIV-98-0946-PHX-ROS - Michelle Caron vs Charles Maxwell
|
Arizona
|
|
The court denied defendants debt collectors' motion to dismiss, because a past-due homeowners' association fee was a debt for the purposes of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, which applied even though the debt did not arise from an extension of credit. The court granted defendant homeowners' association's motion, because it was not a debt collector, and therefore could not be vicariously liable for defendants debt collectors' action.
|
|
September 29, 2006
|
Douglas T Gates v.
Clear Lake City Community Association
|
2006-62945 - Gates vs Clear Lake City Community Association
|
Texas
|
|
|
|
April 16, 1998
|
Robert S. Catz (96-3114/5776); Shawn D. Catz and Jason A. Catz (96-5776) v.
Susan R. Chalker (96-3114/5776); Leonard I. Karp and Annette Everlove (96-3114); Fidelity Investments
|
98a0116p.06 Catz v. Chalker
|
Federal
|
|
For the reasons described below, we affirm in part and reverse in part the judgment of the district court for the Northern District of Ohio, and reverse the judgment of the district court for the Middle District of Tennessee.(1)
|
|
January 16, 2004
|
Jay T. S. Chen v.
Association Lien Services
|
O3CC11691- Chen v Association Lien Services, Niguel Ranch HOA, Swedellson e
|
California
|
|
Niguel Ranch Homeowners Association and Seagate Niguel Homeowners Association settled the case against them. The settlement agreement they entered into was confidential.
Reports are that the homeowner did not get his home back and the settlement "bought peace" and paid attorney fees for litigation.
|
|
September 20, 2006
|
Coldwater Cooperative Inc. v.
Alan Goldstein
|
06B04350 - Coldwater Cooperative v Goldstein, Alan
|
California
|
|
Case disposd. Alan Goldstein was evicted from his home.
|
|
June 07, 2007
|
JAMES HALUCK et al. v.
RICOH ELECTRONICS
|
G035681 - James Haluk et al v RICOH Electronics
|
California
|
|
We conclude the trial judge's conduct was sufficiently egregious and
pervasive that a reasonable person could doubt whether the trial was fair and impartial
and reverse on that ground. On remand, the case shall be assigned to a different judge.
Because we reverse, the motion for sanctions is denied. As to defendants' cross-appeal,
the court properly found the treaty did not bar the action and thus we affirm its ruling.
|
|
July 10, 2003
|
BEVERLY NAVES v.
VAUGHN CONWAY
|
02-7117 (D.C. No. 02-CV-421-S) - Beverly Naves vs Vaughn Conway ... Oklaho
|
Oklahoma
|
|
This court reviews de novo the grant of a motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6) with all well-pleaded factual allegations accepted as true and viewed in the light most favorable to Naves. Sutton v. Utah State Sch. for the Deaf & Blind, 173 F.3d 1226, 1236 (10th Cir. 1999). After review of the district court's orders, the parties' briefs, and the entire record on appeal, this court concludes that the district court did not commit reversible error. Therefore, this court AFFIRMS the district court's grant of Defendants' motions to dismiss for substantially the same reasons set out in the dismissal orders.
|
|
June 08, 2007
|
Beverly Naves v.
Mark Ihrig et all
|
5:2007cv00657 - Beverly Naves vs Mark lhrig et al
|
Oklahoma
|
|
|
|
July 26, 2007
|
COMMITTEE FOR A BETTER TWIN RIVERS (CBTR); DIANNE MCCARTHY; HAIM BAR-AKIVA and BRUCE FRITZGES v.
TWIN RIVERS HOMEOWNERS' ASSOCIATION (TRHA); TWIN RIVERS COMMUNITY TRUST and SCOTT POHL (TRHA PRESIDENT)
|
A-118/122 - Copmmittee for Twin Rivers vs Twin Rivers HOA
|
New Jersey
|
|
Judgment of the Appellate Division is REVERSED and the judgment of the trial court is REINSTATED. CHIEF JUSTICE ZAZZALI and JUSTICES LONG, LaVECCHIA, ALBIN, RIVERA-SOTO and HOENS join in JUSTICE WALLACE'S opinion.
|
|
June 27, 1990
|
Maryland Casualty Company v.
George Wayne Reeder et al
|
No. D008755 - 1990.CA.40617 ; 221 Cal. App. 3d 961; 270 Cal. Rptr. 719
|
California
|
|
|
|
October 25, 2005
|
JOSEPH ZERNIK v.
LA SUPERIOR COURT AND ITS JUDGES
|
SC087400 in LA SUPERIOR COURT, CV-08-01550 US DISTRICT COURT - Zernik v Los
|
California
|
|
|
|
May 22, 2008
|
Janice J. Jackson v.
B LAZY M RANCH OWNER'S ASSOCIATION
|
07-CA-2379
|
Colorado
|
|
|
|
May 22, 2008
|
JANICE J. JACKSON v.
B LAZY M RANCH OWNER'S ASSOCIATION
|
06-CV-23
|
Colorado
|
|
|
|
May 22, 2008
|
JANICE J. JACKSON v.
B LAZY M RANCH OWNERS'S ASSOCIATION
|
07-CA-2379
|
Colorado
|
|
|
