La Jolla Mesa Vista Improvement Association v. La Jolla Mesa Vista Homeowners Association

269 Cal. Rptr. 825 (1990)

From our private database of 45,900+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

La Jolla Mesa Vista Improvement Association v. La Jolla Mesa Vista Homeowners Association

California Court of Appeal
269 Cal. Rptr. 825 (1990)

Facts

The La Jolla Mesa Vista residential development had been governed by a declaration of conditions, covenants, and restrictions (CCRs) since 1957. Before the CCRs were set to expire in late 1986, they were extended by a vote of the majority of homeowners in the development. The extension came about after the La Jolla Mesa Vista Homeowners Association (the original association) (defendant) circulated for approximately six months an extension document that had substantial changes to the CCRs. The extension proponents recorded the extension and modification when they had 52 of the 94 lot owners’ signatures of consent—though three of the 52 signed recissions of their consent before the extension was recorded and four more recissions were executed thereafter. The La Jolla Mesa Vista Improvement Association (the second association) (plaintiff) was formed, and it filed suit against the original association to challenge the validity of the extension. The second association alleged that the extension was invalid because a majority of the development’s owners had not consented to it, as required by the original CCRs. The trial court found that because there was a sufficient number of valid signatures to support the extension, the original association was entitled to judgment. The trial court specifically found that the owners’ signatures on the petition created a binding contract that could not be unilaterally rescinded, reasoning that the chief consideration for the contract was the mutual promise and covenant of the signers. The second association appealed. The parties agreed that to make the extension valid, approval from 48 owners was required. The parties also agreed that when the extension was recorded, there were 52 signatures on the petition. The parties disagreed regarding whether the signatures on the petition could be rescinded.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Benke, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 735,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 735,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 45,900 briefs, keyed to 984 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 735,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 45,900 briefs - keyed to 984 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership