Poser v. Lovett Square Townhomes Owners' Association

702 S.W.2d 226 (1985)

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

Poser v. Lovett Square Townhomes Owners’ Association

Texas Court of Appeals
702 S.W.2d 226 (1985)

Facts

The owners of two condominium units at Lovett Square condominiums (the owners) (plaintiffs) filed suit against the condominium association (the association) (defendant) to enjoin the collection of past-due maintenance assessments pending satisfaction of the owners’ alleged offsets against the assessments. The owners alleged that the association breached its duty to keep their roofs in good condition and that the owners spent their own money to repair their leaking roofs. The association counterclaimed for the past-due assessments. Numerous repairs and steps had been taken to fix the problem with the roofs. And when a majority of unit owners rejected a special assessment, unit owners with serious leakage problems were allowed to immediately repair their roofs at their own expense and be reimbursed later. The trial court, which ruled for the association, found that the owners’ right to offset the assessments was not abrogated but would accrue at some later date, preventing the owners from avoiding their ongoing obligation to timely pay their share of assessments. The trial court also found that (1) the roofing problems were the result of the defective design and construction; (2) the association did not fail or refuse to keep the roofs in good order, condition, and repair; (3) the association took all reasonable and usual maintenance measures; (4) the roofing problems were not the result of any failure to maintain the roofs; and (5) the association’s duty to maintain the common areas was independent of its right to collect maintenance funds, which was supported by the declaration and state condominium law. The trial court also found that because the association acted reasonably regarding the roof issues, the owners were not entitled to avoid maintenance assessments. The owners appealed and alleged a conflict between the trial court’s finding that there were serious leakage problems and its finding that the owners’ obligation to pay maintenance assessments was independent of the association’s duty to maintain the common areas and alleged that reasonable action was no substitute for the association’s duty to properly maintain the common areas.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Bass, 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 733,000 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 733,000 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 733,000 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