Texas homeowner wins a $154,000 lawsuit against her HOA after it enforces unwritten shed rules: ‘I guess appealing was, in retrospect, a bad decision for the HOA’

Homeowner wins $150k judgement against her HOA

mld53a

In an email to all homeowners, the Davis Spring HOA told residents that my lawsuit was “without merit” and claimed that the Architectural Review Committee had “broad authority” to make its determinations.

Two courts and four judges have now answered those claims.

I asked for $150,000 and won $100,000 at trial. The Third Court of Appeals has just affirmed that original judgment in my favor. Due to interest and conditional fees, the final judgment will be more than $154,000. I guess appealing was, in retrospect, a bad decision for the HOA.

An ARC’s authority is not unlimited. It must come from the recorded governing documents, and it cannot substitute unwritten requirements for the restrictions homeowners actually agreed to.

This case was never merely about a shed. It was about whether an HOA must follow its own governing documents and respect the legal rights of the homeowners it serves.

It must.

The HOA had every opportunity to resolve this fairly. Instead, it chose years of litigation and an appeal. That decision imposed substantial and continuing costs on the entire community.

We will soon learn whether insurance will pay the judgment, as the Board promised residents, or whether the homeowners will be required to pay for the Board’s losing decisions.

The judgment—and the truth—now speak for themselves

mld53a

TL;DR

The Appellate Court of Texas just ruled in my favor in my lawsuit against the HOA, and due to interest and fees, my judgement has increased from $100,000 to approximately $154,000 by the time the mandate is issued. And the judgement will increase EVERY month by almost a $1,000 until paid. Every homeowner would have to pay over $260 if a special assessment were levied to pay it.

So the boomerang i talked about is funny because, along with actual authority, courts possess a charmingly old-fashioned affection for written material. Judges like documents, evidence, and the radical notion that homeowners should know the rules before getting punished for breaking them. Four judges across two courts looked at the situation and gave the board’s homemade authority a very expensive performance review.

The original $100,000 judgment grew to around $154,000, with nearly another thousand dollars piling on each month. That's interest with a strong work ethic. 

And so, this shady shed rule could leave every homeowner paying more than $260 for the privilege of watching their own association turn a dispute over a wooden box into a community-funded lesson in consequences.

Insurance may cover the damage, or the homeowners may get the tab. Either way, this board produced a rare neighborhood improvement project where everybody ends up with less money, and one committee gets a memorable legal education.

The funniest part sits inside the phrase “serves the homeowners” HOA boards love so much. That wording makes them sound like public servants instead of tiny emperors with access to a Canva newsletter template. 

Service involves respecting the rules people agreed to live under. It also involves avoiding a six-figure bill while defending rules that existed mostly in somebody’s imagination.