Schaefer v. Eastman Community Association
New Hampshire Supreme Court
836 A.2d 752 (N.H. 2003)
- Written by Anjali Bhat, JD
Facts
Eastman Community Association (ECA) (defendant) was a nonprofit corporation governing Eastman, a private, planned community offering recreational amenities. One such amenity was a downhill skiing area called Snow Hill. Eastman’s governing document was its declaration, which set forth ECA’s powers and the rights of Eastman residents. All property within Eastman was held subject to the declaration. The declaration did not expressly bar closing Snow Hill or reserve to Eastman residents the right to decide whether Snow Hill should be closed. After determining the majority of Eastman residents did not use Snow Hill or consider it important, ECA’s board of directors voted to close Snow Hill and sell its chairlift. Certain homeowners (plaintiffs) filed suit, seeking an injunction barring ECA from closing Snow Hill and selling its chairlift. The plaintiffs also sought damages. The plaintiffs argued ECA acted ultra vires in closing Snow Hill, because the declaration did not provide for ECA’s power to close an amenity. The trial court found that ECA acted ultra vires, and ECA appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Duggan, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 806,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 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.
