CSK Defense Team
West Palm Beach Partner Jillian Strasser
West Palm Beach Associate Emma McCarthy
Case Summary
This case arose from a property dispute involving neighboring homeowners and a homeowners association, represented by CSK. The Plaintiff alleged that improvements made to a neighboring property, including a retaining wall, altered stormwater drainage and negatively affected their property.
The Plaintiffs also claimed that the Defendant HOA improperly approved revised construction plans and failed to follow the Association’s governing documents. The Plaintiffs alleged that they suffered between $1,888,081.14 and $2,575,134.46 in damages related to their claims.
Defense Strategy
The CSK Defense Team focused on whether the HOA properly exercised its authority when reviewing and approving the revised construction plans.
At trial, the Team presented evidence supporting the Association’s decision-making process and maintained that it had not violated the governing covenants. The defense also relied on the business judgment rule, which protects certain decisions made by an HOA when it acts reasonably, in good faith, without acting arbitrarily, and within the scope of its authority.
Outcome
After a little more than an hour of deliberation, the jury returned a verdict in favor of the Defendant. The jury found that the HOA had not failed to do anything required by the governing covenants and had not taken any action prohibited by them.
The verdict highlights the importance of clear approval procedures and well-documented decision-making when community associations review homeowner construction requests. It also illustrates how the business judgment rule can protect associations when their decisions are later challenged
Our team is available to discuss the topics written here and ready to provide additional information contained in this article. Contact us for more information.
