Fourth District, Division 1 Finds Award Disproportionate At First Glance, But Affirms Based Upon Total Review of the Litigation Below.
Homeowner-homeowner association battles can be very, very contentious and expensive for the losing side—as the next homeowner learned, in a dispute over the floor covering in his condominium unit.
McGuire v. 235 On Market Homeowners Assn., Case Nos. D053218/054131 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Dec. 8, 2009) (unpublished) involved a condominium owner who got into an imbroglio with his homeowners association over whether disputed floor tile was an appropriate floor covering in light of noise and acoustical concerns as expressed in certain CC&Rs. Homeowner lost his action, and HOA won judgment on their cross-complaint.
Then, catering to our existence in the blogsphere, the trial court awarded attorney’s fees of $225,200 and costs of $12,803.50 in favor of HOA and against homeowner.
Decision on appeal: affirmed, much to the dismay of homeowner.
Although observing “at first glance . . . this award seems disproportionate to the result in this case (the HOA is now able to enforce its order that McGuire remove three feet and nine inches of tile from the interior of his unit),” the appellate panel’s visceral reaction vanished upon closer review. The appellate record consisted of 16 volumes of records, with two sets of summary and cross-summary judgment motions by both sides. HOA used two different law firms, at different times, which submitted detailed billing statements to show what was done in the litigation. Both firms, together, requested $335,000 in fees, but the trial court only awarded $225,200—a 33% reduction for duplicative or unnecessary fees. Under the circumstances of this contentious litigation, the reviewing court could find no abuse of discretion in the lower court’s fees/costs award. (Children’s Hospital & Medical Center v. Bonta, 97 Cal.App.4th 740, 782 (2002).)
Comments