Procedural Posture: Los Angeles business litigation attorneys

Plaintiff homeowners appealed an order of the Superior Court of Orange County, California, granting defendant homeowners association's Code Civ. Proc., § 425.16, motion to strike the complaint, which asserted causes of action for breach of contract, declaratory relief, nuisance, breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, violations of Civ. Code, § 1378, and Bus. & Prof. Code, § 17200, and breach of fiduciary duty.

Overview

The court agreed with the homeowners that the trial court erred in construing all matters in connection with a homeowners association's application of architectural guidelines as matters to which § 425.16 applied. Not every mundane communication between a homeowners association and a homeowner gave rise to a freedom of speech issue. Section 425.16, subd. (e)(4), did not come into play unless the right of free speech or the right to petition was involved. The cause of action itself had to be based on the speech or petitioning activity. If neither of those rights was at stake, § 425.16, subd. (e)(4), was inapplicable, irrespective of whether the subject of the dispute might otherwise be a matter of public interest. In the instant case, the act of putting demands concerning conditions, covenants, and restrictions compliance in writing gave rise to breach of contract and other causes of action that did not raise free speech concerns. Consequently, the trial court erred in granting the association's motion because the association's actions that formed the basis of the homeowners' causes of action were not undertaken in furtherance of the association's right of free speech.

Outcome

The court reversed the order.