Craig Zgabay and Tammy Zgabay v. NBRC Property Owners Association ( 2015 )


Menu:
  •                                                                        FILED                       ACCEPTED
    Susan Collier       03-14-00660-CV
    4115888
    C2014-0501C THIRD COURT OF APPEALS
    2/10/2015 4:34:54 PM      AUSTIN, TEXAS
    2/11/2015 4:31:35 PM
    Heather N. Kellar
    JEFFREY D. KYLE
    Comal County                       CLERK
    District Clerk
    RECEIVED IN
    3rd COURT OF APPEALS
    AUSTIN, TEXAS
    2/11/2015 4:31:35 PM
    February 10, 2015
    JEFFREY D. KYLE
    Clerk
    via fax on 830-608-2006
    Heather Kellar
    Comal County District Clerk
    150 N. Seguin, Suite 304
    New Braunfels, Texas 78130
    Re:    Appeal No. 03-14-00660-CV, Comal County No. C2014-0501C, Zgabay v.
    NBRC Property Owners Assoc.
    Dear Ms. Kellar:
    I believe that documents, being exhibits to the plaintiff's motion for summary
    judgment, were inadvertently omitted from the Clerk's Record previously transmitted
    to the Third Court of Appeals in this case. My records show that most of Exhibits C and
    all of Exhibits D-F followed what is currently CR51. Portions of Exhibit C and D as
    were returned to me following filing are attached hereto for your convenience. I hereby
    request that the record on appeal be supplemented to include all omitted pages. Oral
    argument is scheduled in the appeal for March 25, 2015.
    Very truly yours,
    J. Patrick Sutton
    cc:
    Jeffrey D. Kyle, Clerk
    Third Court of Appeals
    Wade Crosnoe
    Attachments: exhibit pages
    r .
    n   e
    a n
    sc
    a
    t o
    i   n
    o   ne
    p h
    u r
    y   o
    rn
    tu
    to
    r e
    t   o
    S
    pp
    A
    h e
    t
    in
    F
    D
    P
    To
    r a
    e
    am
    C
    f   or
    o k
    L   o
    s
    ar-b 3. 201-
    First Class       Ct\rtiticd RRR
    7012 2210 0000 5169 7061
    - ..       "-   C   ....J-o
    - '-   Dro\e
    ..__._
    .:--e. .. : Lot 303. Unu III in River Chase
    Re:                             A..  A..'"D
    . RULES \ ' IOLATION
    _                   OF FIXE FOR DECLARATION VIOLATION
    Dec.r _1r. and                        Zagaby:
    '"our property \vithin the RiYcr Chase Subdivision is subject to covenants, conditions an?
    a..: :e: ionh in an instrument entitled Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restncttons Rtver
    Cha:e nit III.
    It as come to the attention of the Board of Directors and n1anagen1ent that your home is being used
    a- a          rental. '"e respectfully request that any and all activities related to the shorf term
    rental of ..Your home cease immediately. "'
    Failure to comply \Vith this request may result in a
    temporary restraining order being placed on your property.
    Spe iiically! you are in Yiolation of Article Ill, Section 3.01 of the Declaration, entitled "Single
    Familv Residential Construction.", \Vhich provides, in relevant parts, as follows:
    ·Except as provided below, no building shall be erected, altered, placed or pennitted to
    rent ain on any Tract other than one dwelling unit per each Tract to be used for single
    fanzily residential purposes."
    And of Article III. Section 3.14 of the Declaration, entitled Prohibition of Offensive Activities.,
    ;\hich provides= in rele\'ant parts, as follows:
    u_ o activity, whether for profit or not, shall be conducted on any Tract which is not
    related to single fa11zily residential pu1poses, unless said activity 111eets the following
    (a) no additional                    sign of activity is present, (b) it is the type of action
    that usually happens in a ho11ze, (c) no additional traffic, that ·would not be there
    normally, is created, and (d) nothing dangerous is present that should not be there. This
    restriction is waived in regard to the custo11zary sales activities required to sell ho11zes in
    the Subdil'ision. The discharge or use of jirean11s is e.1:pressly prohibited. Hunting is
    expressly prohibited. The Association shall have thes csole                        r . absolute discretion to
    a n n eand
    determine what constitutes a nuisance or annoyance."                  t o a
    e in
    y o u r phon
    turn
    e t oTexas
    Pursuant to Section 209.006           p S
    oft o rthe          Property Code, you are hereby notified that you are in
    i n t h e A p governing documents and/or its established rules, as described above,
    \J iolation of the DAssociation's
    F
    To P
    e r ayou
    and
    or   C a m
    that         are entitled to a reasonable period to cure the above-referenced violation and avoid
    f
    Look                  of suspension of your right to use association common areas unless you have' been given
    Zgabay Exhibit C1
    nottce and a reasonable opportunity to cure similar violation within the preceding six months.
    .L\1r. and i\1rs. Zagaby
    i\1arch       2014
    Page 2
    Furthermore, pursuant to Section 209.007 of the Tc\.n · Property Code, you n1ay request a
    before the Board of Directors or conunittec appointed for this purpose. Your request tnust be tn
    writing and delivered to the Board of Directors. at the address sho\\·n below, within thirty (30) days
    of your receipt of this notice. Should you request n hearing, you "ill be given at least ten ( 10) days
    notice of this date, tin1c and place for the hearing. The Board or the O\vner n1ay request a
    and, if requested, the postponement shall be granted for a period of not n1ore than. ten
    (10) days. Such a hearing must be held within thirty (30) days after the date that the Board :ece1ves
    your request. Should the hearing be conducted by the conm1ittee appointed by the Board of Ducctors,
    you \v!ll have the right to appeal the con1n1ittee's decision to the Board by \Vritten notice of appeal to
    the Board.
    You may have special rights or relief related to cnforcen1ent action under federal law, including the
    tnembers Civil Relief Act (50 U.S.C. app. Section 501 et seq.), if you are serving on active
    duty). If that applies to you please let us know, and forward \Vritten proof that you are active
    duty military. If you do not do we will assun1e that you have no such rights.
    Please be certain to correct the above-described violations of the Restrictions itntnediately as your
    faiiure to correct your violations will result in the Association taking further action to bring your
    property into compliance with the Restrictions. You n1ust also remove all advertisement related
    to the short term rental of your property. Should the violations continue to exist on March 28,
    2014 the Association may take further actions and suspend your right to use any recreational
    facilities within the Conunon Area of River Chase.
    Furthermore if we deem it necessary to seek the help of the Association's Attorney, you, the
    property owner ·will be charged the attorney's fees and any and all costs related to bringing
    your property into compliance.
    If you have any questions or if we tnay be of any assistance, please do not hesitate to contact
    Association Management Services by calling 210.582.5989 or toll-free at 866.232 4386 extension
    135.
    Please be advised, the management office is not authorized to ·waive any fines, or violations,
    therefore any disputes or request for revie'v by the Board must be submitted in writin2..
    Morales, CMCA® AMS®, PCAM®
    A sociation Manager
    er   .
    t o a scann
    e in
    cc: River Chase Property Owners Association    y o u r p h o nof Directors
    Board
    turn
    p S t o re to
    Ap
    P D F in the
    era To
    f   or Cam
    Look
    Zgabay Exhibit C1
    EXHIBIT D
    ZGABAY EXHIBIT D
    SHORT-TERM RENTAL CASES
    Case                                Declaration Wording                                    Standard for Interpretation                                Result
    LAND USE. Lots shall be utilized solely for single
    family residential use consisting of single residential
    dwelling and such out-buildings (garage, patio
    structure), as consistent with permanent or
    recreational residence. All habitable structures must                                                             Short-term rentals are not a
    Wilkinson v. Chiwawa                be located not nearer than 20 feet to the front lot                                                               business use. "Had the drafters
    Communities Ass'n, 86870-1,         line. Structures shall be of new construction and                                                                 wanted to prohibit rentals of a
    
    2014 WL 1509945
    (Wash. Apr.         shall not be commenced until building permit of         Intent of drafters, not strictly construed for free use   particular duration, they would
    17, 2014).                          appropriate public body is obtained....                 of land in case of HOA's                                  have done so."
    First, if unclear or ambiguous, then the covenant will
    be resolved in favor of the free enjoyment of the
    property and against the restriction. Second,
    restrictions on land use will not be read into
    covenants by implication lest the free alienability of
    property be frustrated. Third, restrictive covenants
    Estates at Desert Ridge Trails                                                              must be considered reasonably, though strictly, so
    Homeowners' Ass'n v. Vazquez,                                                               that illogical, unnatural or strained construction will
    2013-NMCA-051, 300 P.3d                                                                     not be effected. Fourth, words in a restrictive
    736, 743 (N.M. App. Feb. 8,         No Lot or any portion thereof shall be used except      covenant must be given their ordinary and intended        Short-term rentals are not a
    2013)                               for single-family residential purposes.                 meaning.                                                  business use
    covenants are not favored by the law, and they will
    Russell v. Donaldson, 731                                                                   be strictly construed to the end that all ambiguities
    S.E.2d 535 (N.C. Ct. App. Sept.     All lots shall be used for one family residential       will be resolved in favor of the unrestrained use of      Short-term rentals are not a
    4, 2012)                            purposes only                                           land                                                      business use
    All Lots and Units shall be used only for residential
    use (whether transient or permanent) and incidental
    activities and in compliance with the Resort                                                                      Short-term rentals are not a
    Roaring Lion, LLC v. v. Exclusive   Declaration and applicable law (including zoning                                                                  business use, but issue of fact
    Resorts PBL 1, LLC, CAAP-11-        ordinances and building codes). As provided in the                                                                exists whether lessor provided
    0001072, 
    2013 WL 1759002
    (Haw.      Resort Declaration, no gainful occupation, profession                                                             various amenities and services in
    Ct. App. Apr. 24, 2013)             or trade shall be maintained                            Plain language.                                           the manner of a hotel
    Slaby v. Mtn. River Est. Resid'l                                                            Restrictive covenants are not favored and will be
    Assoc., Inc., 
    2012 WL 1071634
          The subject property is restricted to single family     strictly construed. All doubts must be resolved
    (Ala. Ct. Civ. App. March 30,       residential purposes only. No commercial,               against the restriction and in favor of free and          Short-term rentals are not a
    2012)                               agricultural or industrial use shall be permitted.      unrestricted use of property.                             business use
    Arkansas courts do not favor restrictions on the use
    of land, and if there is a restriction on the land, it
    must be clearly apparent. Restrictive covenants are
    Dunn v. Aamodt, 2012 WL                                                                     to be strictly construed against limitations on the
    137463 (W.D. Ark. Jan. 18,                                                                  free use of property, and all doubts are resolved in      Short-term rentals are not a
    2012)                               Sites must be used for residential purposes only.       favor of the unfettered use of the land.                  business use
    Deed restrictions are to be read reasonably but
    said property and the improvements thereon shall        strictly and, to the extent language is unclear or
    be used for dwelling purposes only and that no part ambiguous, the issue of enforcement of a restriction
    Mason Family Trust v.               thereof shall at any time be used for business or       will be resolved in favor of the free enjoyment of the    Short-term rentals are not a
    DeVaney, 
    146 N.M. 199
    (2009)        commercial purposes                                     property and against limitations                          business use
    restrictive covenants, being in derogation of the
    common law right to use land for all lawful purposes,
    Ross v. Bennett, 148                                                                        will not be extended to any use not clearly expressed,
    Wash.App. 40 (Wash.Ct.App.-         all parcels within said property shall be used for      and doubts must be resolved in favor of the free use      Short-term rentals are not a
    Div. 1 2009)                        residence purposes only                                 of land                                                   business use
    ZGABAY EXHIBIT D
    SHORT-TERM RENTAL CASES
    restrictive covenants disfavored and justified only to
    Applegate v. Colucci, 908         All parcels shall be used only for residential         the extent they are unambiguous and enforcement is
    N.E.2d 1214 (Ind. Ct. App.        purposes. No commercial business shall be carried      not adverse to public policy. Restrictive covenants
    2009)                             on upon any parcel.... Nothing herein contained        are strictly construed, and all doubts are resolved in
    shall prevent the leasing or renting of property or    favor of the free use of property and against          Short-term rentals are not a
    structures for residential use                         restrictions                                           business use
    restrictions are not favored, and the burden is on him
    who would enforce such covenants to establish that
    the activity objected to is within their terms. They
    are to be construed most strictly against the grantor
    and persons seeking to enforce them, and substantial
    Scott v. Walker, 
    274 Va. 209
                                                               doubt or ambiguity is to be resolved in favor of the   Short-term rentals are not a
    (2007)                            No lot shall be used except for residential purposes. free use of property and against restrictions          business use
    Lowden v. Bosley, 
    395 Md. 58
         All lots shall be used for single family residential                                                         Short-term rentals are not a
    (2006)                            purposes only.                                        Plain language.                                        business use
    [a]ll units and restricted common elements shall be
    used, improved and devoted exclusively to
    residential use by a single family.” Section 6.2 states
    that “[n]o business, trade, occupation or profession
    of any kind shall be conducted, maintained or             Give effect to the intent of the parties as expressed in
    Mullin v. Silvercreek Condo.   permitted on any part of the property[.] ... Nothing      the plain language of the covenant; but, when there
    Owners Assoc., Inc., 195       in this [s]ection 6.2 is intended to restrict the right   is any ambiguity or substantial doubt as to the
    S.W.3d 484 (Missouri Ct. App. of any condominium unit owner to rent or lease his         meaning, restrictive covenants will be read narrowly Short-term rentals are not a
    2006)                          (their) condominium unit from time to time[.]             in favor of the free use of property.                    business use
    no commercial or industrial ventures or business of
    any type may be maintained or constructed” upon
    any residential lot. No more than one (1) single
    family dwelling may be constructed upon any
    residential lot. The Uniform Building Code shall be       General rules of contract construction. However,
    used to define any term not defined herein. if a term     because restrictive covenants are in derogation of the
    is used that is not defined in the Covenants or the       common law right to use land for all lawful purposes,
    Pinehaven Planning Bd. v.      Uniform Building Code, Webster's Dictionary shall         the Court will not extend by implication any             Short-term rentals are not a
    Brooks, 
    138 Idaho 826
    (2003) be the source used for definition of terms.                 restriction not clearly expressed.                       business use
    All lots within said tract shall be used exclusively      restrictive covenants are to be construed most
    for residential purposes and no commercial                strictly against the covenant; and unless the use
    Yogman v. Parrott, 
    325 Or. 358
    enterprise shall be constructed or permitted on any       complained of is plainly within the provisions of the    Short-term rentals are not a
    (1997)                         of said property.                                         covenant it will not be restrained                       business use
    Plaintiff's short-term rentals
    waived Defendant's as to first part
    of clause; since Defendant company
    Shields Mtn. Prop. Owners         No lot may be utilized for any commercial or           restrictive covenants are to be strictly construed and   ran 27 full-time rental properties
    Assoc., Inc. v. Teffelter, 2006   industrial purpose or for any commercial husbandry     will not be extended by implication and any              and never used subject property for
    WL 408050 (Tenn.Ct.App.           or agricultural activity. All lots shall be used for   ambiguity in the restriction will be resolved against    personal purposes, its sole purpose
    2006)                             residential purposes exclusively.                      the restriction                                          was commercial
    short-term rentals would be
    permitted under traditional
    principles of restrictive covenant
    construction favoring free use of
    land;
    liberal construction under TEX. PROP.CODE ANN. §
    202.003(a) (construed in a manner which may              temporary, retreat purposes, or
    occasionally run hard afoul of strict common law         transient housing not permitted
    Benard v. Humble, 990 S.W.2d                                                             requirements, i.e., strict construction favoring         under "liberal" construction appied
    929 (Tex.App.-Beaumont 1999) single-family residence purposes                            grantee, and strict construction against the drafter)    in Beaumont
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 03-14-00660-CV

Filed Date: 2/11/2015

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 9/29/2016