Developers Properly Denied $1.950 Million In Attorney’s Fees Against HOA Under Either Civil Code Section 1717 Or The Common Fund/Substantial Benefit Doctrine (CA)

Market Lofts Community Assn. v. 9th Street Market Lofts, LLC, Case Nos. B280446/B282412 (2d Dist., Div. 2 Nov. 13, 2018) (unpublished) involved a case where an HOA lost a suit against Developers based on a Parking License Agreement (PLA) to which HOA was not a party, with the PLA containing a fees clause. HOA was a party to a sublicense agreement with a fees clause. The lower court denied fees to certain Developers totaling about $1.950 million, as against HOA, finding that it was not a party to the PLA (which prevented Civil Code section 1717) and that the common fund/substantial benefit theory could not provide an anchor for recovery.     Read the article………………….

Editor

Recent Posts

Philippines: House unanimously approves proposed Condominium Redevelopment Act

The measure providing for the redevelopment of condominiums in the country has been unanimously approved…

11 hours ago

Shining a Light on Rooftop Solar for Massachusetts Condo Owners

After the Trustees of his condominium refused his request for an Architectural Variance to install…

11 hours ago

Iowans struggle to find homeowners insurance as companies pullout of the state

David Langston is the President of Beaver Creek Homeowners Association and one of his many…

11 hours ago

Real Estate Counselor: Horrific fall due to rotted balcony leads to condo litigation (FL)

A March ruling by Florida’s First District Court of Appeal and the 2016 incident behind…

11 hours ago

Southampton man convicted of fraud, money laundering (NY)

Officials said that Slothower devised a scheme to misappropriate more than $1 million from clients…

11 hours ago

Condo Smarts: No specified time period for project completion (BC)

Dear Tony: Thank you for your column last week regarding levy refunds.  Our strata council…

11 hours ago