Case Summary
Case ID | 22F-H2222044-REL |
---|---|
Agency | ADRE |
Tribunal | OAH |
Decision Date | 2022-07-29 |
Administrative Law Judge | Velva Moses-Thompson |
Outcome | loss |
Filing Fees Refunded | $500.00 |
Civil Penalties | $0.00 |
Parties & Counsel
Petitioner | David G. Iadevavia | Counsel | — |
---|---|---|---|
Respondent | Ventana Shadows Homeowners Association, Inc. | Counsel | Carolyn B. Goldschmidt, Esq. |
Alleged Violations
CC&R Section 2.16
Outcome Summary
The HOA did not violate its duties by selectively enforcing CC&R Section 2.16 against Petitioner regarding his mobile observatory.
Why this result: Petitioner failed to prove that the mobile observatory was not a trailer under the plain and obvious meaning of CC&R Section 2.16, or that the HOA's enforcement constituted illegal selective enforcement.
Key Issues & Findings
Selective enforcement of CC&R Section 2.16 regarding vehicles/trailers.
Petitioner alleged that the HOA selectively enforced CC&R Section 2.16 (regarding parking/vehicles/trailers) against him concerning his 'mobile observatory' while failing to enforce the rule or similar rules against other homeowners (sheds).
Orders: The Administrative Law Judge determined that the HOA did not violate its duties by selectively enforcing CC&R Section 2.16 against the Petitioner.
Filing fee: $500.00, Fee refunded: No
Disposition: respondent_win
- Arizona Biltmore Estates vs. TZAC, 868 T2 1030
- Arizona Biltmore Estates vs. TZAC, 177 Arizona 47
- Burke versus Voice Screen Wireless Corporation, 87P381
- Burke versus Voice Screen Wireless Corporation, 207 Arizona 393
- Restatement (Third) of Property: Servitudes § 6.13(1)(b),(c) (2000)
- A.R.S. §32-2199.02(B)
- A.R.S. § 41-1092.09
- A.R.S. § 41-1092.08(H)
- A.R.S. § 12-904(A)
- A.R.S. 41-1092.07
- A.A.C. R2-19-106(D)
- A.A.C. R2-19-113(A)(3) and (4)
- A.A.C. R2-19-116
Analytics Highlights
- CC&R Section 2.16
- Restatement (Third) of Property: Servitudes
- Arizona Biltmore Estates vs. TZAC
- Burke versus Voice Screen Wireless Corporation