Peak Investments v. South Peak Homeowners Association, Inc.

44 Cal. Rptr. 3d 892 (2006)

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

Peak Investments v. South Peak Homeowners Association, Inc.

California Court of Appeal
44 Cal. Rptr. 3d 892 (2006)

Facts

Peak Investments and homeowners Norman and Rita Lesman (plaintiffs) sued the South Peak Homeowners Association (the association) (defendant) to reduce the percentage of homeowner votes needed to amend the declaration of covenants, conditions, and restrictions (CCRs) after a vote at a meeting of homeowners failed to yield the required votes of two-thirds of the lot owners. At the homeowners’ meeting, only 32 of a possible 63 votes were cast in person or by proxy, with 21 voting in favor of the amendment and 11 against it. The Lesmans asked the court to reduce the percentage necessary to amend the CCRs because the CCRs required a supermajority and not enough homeowners attended or cast a proxy. The trial court granted the Lesmans’ petition after finding that the 21 of 32 votes in favor of the amendment more than satisfied the state’s condominium act—the Davis-Stirling Act—which the court found required more than 50 percent of those actually voting to vote in favor of the amendment. The trial court also found that the amendment was reasonable, which was also required under state law. The association appealed, arguing that the state law required an affirmative vote by more than 50 percent of all owners, not just those who attended the meeting or voted by proxy. The amendment in question sought to clarify a typographical error in the minimum sideline setback. The lawyer for the association’s board of directors who prepared the prior amendment with the incorrect value advised the Lesmans that the error was inadvertent and that he had proposed a corrected version, which the association declined to execute.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Sills, 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 736,000 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 736,000 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 736,000 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