Skip to main content

Royalton Woods Homeowner Association, Inc. v. Phillip Soholt

Tenn. Ct. App.January 29, 2019No. M2018-00596-COA-R3-CV
Mixed ResultPhillip Soholt

Case Details

Judge(s)
Presiding Judge Frank G. Clement, Jr.
Status
Published
Procedural Posture
summary judgment

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Excerpt

This appeal arises from a dispute between a residential homeowner association and the owners of a lot in the subdivision. The trial court granted partial summary judgment to the association upon the determination that the subject property was encumbered by the Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions ("CCRs"), due in part to the fact that the CCRs were expressly referenced and incorporated into the Special Warranty Deed conveyed to the homeowners. The court also granted summary judgment upon the finding it was undisputed that the challenged improvements made to the property by the homeowners, the parking of commercial vehicles on the street in front of the house, and operating a business out of the home were in violation of the CCRs. Following a hearing on damages and injunctive relief, the trial court issued an injunction ordering the homeowners to remove the unauthorized improvements, stop parking commercial vehicles on the street in front of the home, and cease conducting their business out of the home, and awarded unpaid assessments and attorney's fees to the association. On appeal, the homeowners argue that their lot is not encumbered by the restrictive covenants, the association did not have standing or authority to enforce the restrictions, and the homeowners did not violate the restrictions. Additionally, the homeowners take issue with the court's failure to apply the doctrine of laches, its decision to summarily dismiss their slander of title claim against the homeowner association, and the award of attorney's fees. We have determined there is a genuine dispute of fact concerning whether the homeowners were conducting their business out of the home in violation of the CCRs which precludes summary judgment therefore, we reverse the grant of summary judgment on that claim. We affirm the trial court's rulings in all other respects.

What This Ruling Means

**What Happened:** This case involved a dispute between Royalton Woods Homeowner Association and homeowners Phillip Soholt and others over property restrictions in a residential subdivision. The homeowner association claimed that certain rules and restrictions (called CCRs - covenants, conditions, and restrictions) applied to the homeowners' property lot. The homeowners apparently disagreed that these restrictions were binding on their property. **What the Court Decided:** The Tennessee Court of Appeals ruled partially in favor of the homeowner association. The court determined that the property restrictions did apply to the homeowners' lot because these restrictions were specifically mentioned and included in the deed when the property was purchased. The court granted partial summary judgment to the association on this key issue. **Why This Matters for Workers:** While this case primarily deals with property law rather than traditional employment issues, it demonstrates how written agreements and contracts are legally binding when their terms are clearly stated and properly incorporated. For workers, this reinforces the importance of carefully reading employment contracts, non-compete agreements, and other workplace documents, as courts will generally enforce terms that are explicitly included and properly referenced in these agreements.

This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.

This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.