Recent Case Law

Hillside Villas Condominium Association, Inc. v. Bottaro Development Company
The Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania found that a property owner who did not unconditionally sell property to a condominium developer was liable as a co-declarant for common element warranties. (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2018)

Palisades At Fort Lee Condominium Association, Inc. v. 100 Old Palisade, LLC
The Supreme Court of New Jersey held that the statute of limitations on a community association's claims against a builder/developer does not begin running until "a plaintiff is able to discover, through the exercise of reasonable diligence, the facts that form the basis for an actionable claim against an identifiable defendant." (N.J. 2017)

In re: Sligh v. N Point Condo
The U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania held that a judicial sale is a threshold requirement for super-lien status of an association's lien under the Pennsylvania Uniform Condominium Act. (Bankr. E.D. Pa. Dec. 3, 2015)

Prioleau v. Kentucky Fried Chicken, Inc
"The mode-of-operation rule applies only in situations where the customer foreseeably serves himself or herself, or otherwise directly engages with products or services unsupervised by an employee. Plaintiff's theories of liability did not involve a self-service operation that might warrant a mode-of-operation jury instruction. Because the trial court's erroneous mode-of-operation charge may well have determined the jury's verdict, defendant is entitled to a new trial on the issue of liability." (Justia, 2015)

In re: Kelly L. Mankowka
"The US Court of Appeals held that the lien for assessments created by Section 5315 of the Pennsylvania Planned Community Act can only be preserved for statute of limitation purposes, by an in rem foreclosure action. In the context of bankruptcy therefore, the statutory lien for assessments accruing more than three years prior to the filing of a bankruptcy, unless enforced by an action in foreclosure, is unenforceable." (Clemons Law, 2014)

Dublirer v. 2000 Linwood Avenue Owners Inc.
"The Supreme Court says the New Jersey Constitution protects against unreasonably restrictive or oppressive conduct by private entities in certain circumstances. N.J. Coal. Against War in the Middle East v. J.M.B. Realty Corp., and State v Schmid addressed the balance between the rights of owners of private property used by the public and the free speech rights of visitors." (FindLaw, 2014)

Luchejko v. City of Hoboken, New Jersey Supreme Court, July 2011
"The issue on appeal before the Supreme Court was whether a condominium complex is liable in tort for injury sustained by a pedestrian on its abutting sidewalk. Upon review of the appellate record, the Supreme Court found that the Appellate Division properly analyzed the facts of this case and concluded that no sidewalk liability attached for the injury to Plaintiff." (Justia, 2011)

Mazdabrook Commons Homeowners Association v. Khan, New Jersey Supreme Court, Argued October 2011
The Supreme Court is considering how far a homeowner's association can go in restricted political signs on properties without violating residents' First Amendment rights: "A divided Appellate Division panel found last year that Mazdabrook Commons Homeowners Association's ban on signs, other than those advertising a home for sale, was not content-neutral, favoring commercial speech." (Michael Booth, New Jersey Law Journal, 2011)

Dublirer v. 2000 Linwood Ave. Owners, Inc., Appellate Division of the Superior Court of New Jersey, August 2011 
The court struck down a regulation prohibiting a unit owner from distributing election materials:
“The regulation prohibits posting of written material on one's own door or window, distribution of written material anywhere on the premises, contribution to the board's newsletter and, as understood by the members of the board, delivery of political-like speech related to board elections by going door-to-door. The restrictions are not reasonable and do not meet Twin Rivers' minimum requirement of reasonableness as to time, place and manner.”
(Justia, 2011)

Bell Tower Condominium Association v. Haffert, Appellate Division of the Superior Court of New Jersey, January 2012
The New Jersey court took a broad view of a statute mandating ADR in condo cases: "The court gave shape to the definition of "housing-related disputes" that are subject to alternative dispute resolution under the Condominium Act. Mandatory ADR applies to "any matter arising directly from the condominium relationship," the Appellate Division said." (Charles Toutant, New Jersey Law Journal, 2011)

Joseph Fernicola and Rosemary Fernicola v. Pheasant Run at Barnegat Pheasant Run Homeowners' Association, Inc., July 2010
"Plaintiffs sued for personal injuries sustained in a sidewalk trip-and-fall accident on defendant's property, which is a residential condo complex. The case was treated as though gross negligence was alleged. The property management of Pheasant Run believed that repairs of the sidewalk were not warranted. The defendant filed a motion for summary judgment (which was granted), and the case was dismissed." (FindLaw, 2010)