In August of 1986, Workman and his wife entered into an agreement to purchase lot three in Silver Lake Estates No. 2. A short time thereafter, Workman and his wife were issued a certificate for one share of stock in Brighton. He asserted that Brighton had no authority to make an assessment that did not benefit a party against whom the assessment was made. Workman moved for summary judgment. The district court denied Workman's summary judgment motion and sua sponte entered judgment in favor of Brighton.
Workman now appeals.
Workman makes a number of arguments, but they all involve the claim that the assessment is not within Brighton's power. Brighton responds that the governing documents permit the assessment, and, therefore, the district court's decision should be upheld. We begin with the relevant documents. The purposes for which this corporation is organized as a non-profit corporation are . . . To engage in . . .