Telluride Lodge Association v. Zoline

707 P.2d 998 (1985)

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

Telluride Lodge Association v. Zoline

Colorado Court of Appeals
707 P.2d 998 (1985)

Facts

Pursuant to the declaration creating a condominium complex in Telluride, Colorado, and its governing body, the Telluride Lodge Association (the association) (plaintiff), the association was responsible for the exclusive management, control, operation, maintenance, repair, and payment for improvements of the common elements in the complex. The declarations also provided that each condominium unit owner, by acceptance of a deed of the unit, agreed to pay, among other things, special assessments levied by the association for capital improvements. In 1977 the town of Telluride, Colorado, determined that flat roofs on the building of a condominium complex were unsafe because they were leaking severely and were unable to withstand heavy snow. The complex was ordered to be condemned unless repairs were made. At a meeting of the board of directors of the association, three different repair plans from three qualified architects were reviewed, and a plan that called for pitched roofs was elected. Owners of several units in the condominium complex (defendants) objected because they preferred a different plan that would not eliminate certain clerestory windows. Nevertheless, the association assessed each unit owner an annual per-unit fee to cover the cost of the repair and reconstruction. When the objecting owners refused to pay the assessment, the association filed a notice of lien against their units. The objecting owners argued that the association had no authority to undertake the repairs over the objections of several unit owners and cited a common-law rule that provided that a cotenant may not make improvements on jointly owned property without the consent of the other cotenants, and even if the association did have such authority, it acted unreasonably. The trial court ruled for the association but denied attorney’s fees. The parties cross-appealed.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Tursi, 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 734,000 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 734,000 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 734,000 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