Opinion ID: 6536716
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Trial and post-trial orders

Text: The case proceeded to a five-day bench trial on the remaining issues in late August 2017. Whitestone presented the testimony of multiple unit owners, while the Blacks called a former unit owner who had been Whitestone's treasurer when they made their 2014 payment. Both Black and Brill also testified. In their closing argument, the Blacks agreed to the dismissal of their counterclaims for an injunction, based on the failure to provide notice of meetings, and for punitive damages, saying that they did not believe there's evidence sufficient to award either of those. After the parties gave their closing arguments, the court issued a decision on the record. The court stated that [t]his isn't a close call and resolved all the issues in Whitestone's favor, awarding it $11,518.20 in damages. It explained that this was largely a credibility case, and found every one of [Whitestone's] witnesses to be very, very credible. On the other hand, the court said that it did not find Black's explanations of his actions to be credible and found that Black was trying to sneak up on the association, which the court considered an act of bad faith. The court found that Black had created ... a decade of animosity and mistrust amongst [himself] and [his] neighbors and ... w[as] simply not willing to abide by the declaration and accept the 2005 vote that rejected his alternative dues structure. It explained that it concluded from testimony that Black had bullied everybody with [his] position as a lawyer and that this demeanor was evident in his filings and presentation before the court. The court further explained that despite Black's posturing, his legal arguments were not as strong as he believed: [T]he facts establish that [he was] very assertive and self-confident with the association, but under the light of day here in this courtroom, [he] had no substance to that assertion. The Blacks filed a motion for reconsideration, which the superior court denied with a written order. In it the court explained the basis for its decision that Whitestone's claims were not time-barred. It concluded that the Blacks' payment directives were not binding on the association for two reasons: first that they could not override a provision of the declaration that gave Whitestone ... the right to apply payments received to the oldest debts first, and second that Black had breached a fiduciary duty to the association by not warn[ing] his fellow board members and unit owners what the effect of ignoring his payment directives might be while he was a board member from 2005 to 2009. For these reasons, the superior court found that while the Blacks may have made payment directives, they made no effective payment directives. (Emphasis in original.) The superior court issued its final judgment and a decree of foreclosure in October 2017 and granted Whitestone full attorney's fees in January 2018. In all, it granted Whitestone a total monetary judgment of $132,670.16: $11,518.20 for unpaid assessments, associated late fees, and interest (less $4,382, which the Blacks had already paid into the court registry) and $125,533.96 in attorney's fees and costs. The court placed a foreclosure lien in that amount on the Blacks' property. The Blacks appeal.