Santa Ana, California

I won a big victory in Orange County Superior Court today against the Eastbluff Homeowners Community Association!

The Association had denied my clients, the Simons, architectural approval on the grounds that their proposed second-story addition would block views. Yet, the CC&Rs do not provide fo view protection.

The language of the CC&Rs provide as follows:

"Section 1. Architectural Approval. No building, fence, wall or other structure shall be commenced, erected or maintained upon the properties, nor shall any exterior addition to or change or alteration therein, including patio covers and antennas, be made until the plans and specifications showing the nature, kind, shape, height, and materials and location of the same shall have been submitted to and approved in writing as to harmony of external design and location in relation to surrounding structures and topography by the Architectural Committee provided for in Section 3 hereof. . ."

The Association argued that the word "harmony" in conjunction with "topography" meant there was view protection. The Association even called Raymond Watson, the Irvine Company's #3 executive to testify. His attempt to explain why the CC&Rs included express view protection for trees and fences, but not second story additions or enlargements was totally lame. His explanation made no sense whatsoever.

Judge Mandel awarded my clients $50,000 in damages, plus attorney's fees and costs (the amount of which will be determined at a later hearing).

Ronald D. Steinbach - Attorney for Homeowner

From: "Ron Steinbach" <ronsteinbach@earthlink.net>


To: <ahrc@ahrc.com>
Subject: Re: Eastbluff Homeowners Community Association

ROBERT A. SIMON, and KATHLEEN H. SIMON, Plaintiffs, vs. EASTBLUFF HOMEOWNERS COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION, a California non-profit corporation; and DOES 1 to 100, inclusive, Orange County Superior Court Case No. 80-80-94. The case was originally assigned to Judge John M. Watson, but tried before Judge Jack K. Mandel.

I will be shortly writing up a summary of the case and the ruling.  I am waiting for a transcript of the closing arguments, which will be in both hard copy and computer formats.  (I already have a transcript of the testimony of Raymond Watson, the #3 man at The Irvine Company.)

A court hearing on the amount of attorney's fees will be held on April 12th.  The sum of $86,106.25 has been requested in attorney's fees, and the defense is requesting that that sum be reduced.  The defense has also filed a motion to tax certain costs, and that hearing is in early May.