7. PROTECTED SPEECH: Golden Eagle Land Investment, LP v. Rancho Santa Fe Association


TAKEAWAY - Only members of an Association have standing to challenge board actions on the grounds of non-compliance with the Open Meeting Act.


FACTS - A land owner brought an action against an Association for interfering with the owner’s ability to have its land annexed into the development.


Te land owner challenged actions taken by the


Association before a County Planning Agency, as well as during various Board meetings. Te trial court granted the Association’s Special Motion to Strike (Anti-SLAPP Motion), regarding all but one cause of action, holding that the claims arose from constitutionally protected official and speech and petition activity, and that the land owner had failed to show a likelihood of prevailing on the merits. However, as to a single cause of action, alleging non-compliance with the Open Meeting Act, the trial court denied the motion on the grounds that it alleged “illegal activity,” and the Anti-SLAPP statute does not protect illegal actions.


COURT’S RULING - Te Court of Appeal reversed the trial court on the Open Meeting Act claim, holding that it arose from protected activity, and that it was not possible to conclusively determine whether some illegality occurred within the meaning of the Open Meeting Act, because the agenda for the meeting set forth issues familiar to Association members that were matters of “public interest” within the meaning of the anti-SLAPP statute (“private conduct that impacts a broad segment of society and/or that affects a community in a manner similar to that of a governmental entity”)


Te Court then proceeded to determine that the developer could not show a likelihood of success on the Open Meeting Act claim, because the developer was not a member of the Association and, thus, lacked standing to insist that its project be added to the Association Board meeting agenda, and lacked standing to invoke the Open Meeting Act as the basis of a claim for damages. Te Davis-Stirling Act only authorizes a member of an association to bring a civil action for certain limited remedies to redress alleged violations of the Open Meeting Act.


8. STANDING:


Sierra Palms Homeowners Association v. Metro Gold Line Foothill Extension Construction Authority


TAKEAWAY – An Association is a de facto representative of its individual members, and it has the right to assert claims for common area damage, regardless of the particular legal theory of liability.


FACTS - Association filed a lawsuit against Metro Gold for negligence, nuisance and inverse condemnation, alleging that a government mass transit authority was interfering with the individual owners’ quiet enjoyment of their property and causing physical damage to a property line wall. Te trial court dismissed the lawsuit on the grounds that a non-owner was precluded from asserting a claim for inverse condemnation. Te Court of Appeal r determined that the Association was the real party in interest because it was responsible for maintaining the property and could handle the cost of prosecuting the matter as a common expense. Te Court determined that the public policy reasons for allowing Associations to sue a non-government entity for damage applies equally to public entities.


ALLISON ANDERSEN represents community associations in corporate governance, operational, transactional, and civil litigation matters. She has over fifteen years’ experience negotiating and litigating CC&R enforcement, real estate fraud and disclosure, contract interpretation and compliance, breach of fiduciary duty, fair housing, free speech, due process, and insurance coverage matters. She specializes in complex construction defect matters and has successfully mediated the settlement of claims for water intrusion at exterior cladding systems (siding, stucco, stone veneer and curtain walls), roofing systems, windows, bal- conies, decks, stairways and entry landings; mechanical systems (hot water distribution, air conditioning, humidity control, gray water discharge); structural systems; foundation systems (post-tensioned slab on grade and elevated podium deck structures); electrical systems; acoustical systems; and civil infrastructure including site drainage, reclaimed water distribution, attachment of municipal sewer mains to private lots, differential settlement, soil stability and groundwater dewatering systems. Ms. Andersen achieved notable success managing condominium conversion claims through settlement and trial.


 21


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32