For HOA lawyers, this is one of the stronger Arizona Superior Court examples of a court allowing an association to prosecute owner claims collectively when the governing documents and the underlying property rights make representative litigation sensible. It is especially useful in disputes involving shared easements,…

This ruling is highly useful in Arizona HOA fights involving master associations, recreation corporations, country-club style entities, or other hybrids that collect mandatory charges from homeowners while claiming they are outside usual HOA rules. It supports a substance-over-form argument: if ownership of a home eff…

For HOA boards and collection counsel, this is a hard lesson in litigation discipline. If a collection case goes sideways in justice court, the first question is not whether the lower court was wrong. The first question is whether the appeal was filed on time. If that deadline is missed, the merits usually do not matt…

For Arizona HOAs, this ruling is a warning against aggressive default practice in succession cases. If the association is trying to collect from a surviving spouse, heir, devisee, or occupant after an owner’s death, it needs to confirm who actually holds title or obligation before filing and serving the case. For home…

A Z N H is a high-value case for Arizona HOA governance fights. It gives owners a published appellate tool for challenging rubber-stamp secrecy, vague agendas, and closed-door votes. For boards and managers, it is a real compliance case, not just a technical one. Meeting notices, agendas, and executive-session practic…

Windrose is likely to become a central Arizona authority on post-sale challenges to HOA foreclosures. It gives purchasers and associations a strong finality argument once a sale has been completed. For homeowners, the case means defenses and cure efforts need to happen earlier. After the sale, equitable arguments that…

Gross is one of the best Arizona Court of Appeals cases for short-term-rental disputes after Kalway. It gives both sides a usable analytic framework for asking whether an amendment is genuinely foreseeable or instead a new restriction in disguise. Boards considering rental amendments should read it before drafting. Ho…

Gallery is not about everyday rule enforcement, but it is highly relevant to Arizona HOA governance and litigation authority. It broadens what an association can do when pursuing developer or builder claims tied to common-area and common-maintenance obligations. For boards, it is a strong appellate foundation for cent…

This is a useful Arizona appellate decision for anyone litigating HOA foreclosure surplus funds. It narrows arguments by senior lenders and helps define where the surplus does and does not go. For investors and owners, Tortosa is important because surplus disputes often decide whether an HOA sale leaves any real equit…

Cao is unusually important for Arizona condominium practitioners. It limits after-the-fact use of statutory changes to restructure owners’ exit rights and compensation in termination deals. For minority owners, the case provides serious appellate support for arguing that purchase-time expectations and fair notice stil…

Laveen Meadows is a strong collection-side precedent for Arizona HOAs. It makes late-stage partial cures much less likely to derail a case once statutory foreclosure eligibility has attached. For homeowners and counsel, it means payoff strategy matters. A partial payment may reduce exposure, but it may not undo the as…

This case matters for HOA lawyers who handle long-tail collection work. It helps answer where to renew a transcribed judgment and reduces the risk that a valid assessment judgment will lapse through a procedural mistake. At the same time, it warns associations not to assume that every later collection step automatical…

Whitmer is the appellate answer when an HOA loses in the administrative process but still refuses to comply. It confirms that the superior court is the proper place to seek enforcement rather than starting over from scratch. For practitioners, the case helps frame post-agency strategy in Arizona HOA disputes and reinf…

McNally is highly useful in HOA board-power disputes. It limits majority control tactics against dissident directors and reinforces that board process must track real authority, not political convenience. For directors and members, the case supports the idea that elected office in an HOA carries enforceable participat…

For HOA collection counsel, this case is mandatory reading. It shows that Arizona appellate courts will not treat sloppy or aggressive default foreclosure practice as harmless when lien priority is misrepresented. For owners, lenders, and title insurers, Cypress is a powerful case for attacking HOA foreclosure judgmen…

This case matters because it shows that not every accessibility dispute in an HOA becomes a winning fair-housing or contract case. Plaintiffs still need a clear link between the requested accommodation, the statutory duty, and the actual housing-related barrier. For boards, Nolan is not a license to ignore disability…

This is a major Arizona authority on whether an association can bootstrap itself into mandatory status. It is especially useful in disputes involving older subdivisions, informal neighborhood associations, and retrofitted assessment schemes. For boards and developers, the lesson is blunt: if the burden is supposed to…

This is a foundational Arizona case for homeowners arguing selective or non-enforcement. It limits the idea that a board can avoid judicial review by labeling a dispute as an exercise of association discretion. For boards, the case is a warning that they need a document-based reason for enforcement choices, especially…

This is one of the clearest Arizona HOA cases on disability accommodations. Boards cannot assume that a valid CC&R or age restriction automatically ends the analysis when a disability-related request is made. For homeowners and counsel, the case is a strong reminder that fair-housing duties can override otherwise enfo…

This case strengthens one of the main practical tools Arizona HOAs use in defect litigation: assignments from owners. Without that tool, associations can be forced into inefficient owner-by-owner suits or fragmented litigation. For developers and transactional lawyers, Pointe 16 is a drafting warning. If the goal is r…

For Arizona HOAs, the case confirms that owner easement rights in common areas are not abstract amenities. They are compensable property interests. That matters in condemnation, utility, roadway, and infrastructure disputes involving common-area burdens. The decision also reinforces the representative role of an HOA w…

This is now the leading Arizona case on condominium terminations and forced buyouts. Associations, investors, and counsel can no longer assume that a supermajority can use termination to squeeze out a minority one unit at a time while keeping majority-owned units outside the sale. The case also matters beyond terminat…

For Arizona HOA practice, this is the controlling case on CC&R amendments. Boards now have to ask not just whether they got the required vote, but whether the original declaration fairly warned owners that the specific type of restriction might later be adopted. For homeowners and counsel, Kalway is the main defense a…

This case is a powerful tool for Arizona condo associations and, by extension, many HOA construction-defect plaintiffs. It helps associations sue the party that actually did the defective work instead of being boxed into claims only against the original seller. Developers, builders, and HOA counsel still cite Lofts in…

If Kalway is Arizona’s leading amendment case, Powell is its leading interpretation case. Lawyers still start with Powell when arguing what a declaration means. For boards and owners, the practical lesson is simple: Arizona courts will not read CC&Rs sentence by sentence in a vacuum. They will ask what the covenants w…

Boards and homeowners routinely fight about fee awards after CC&R cases. This decision gives both sides a clear rule: do not assume courier bills, postage, copies, travel-type charges, and similar items are recoverable unless some other authority clearly allows them. For counsel, the drafting point is practical. If an…

Shelby is one of the clearest Arizona Supreme Court statements that condominium owners truly own legally cognizable interests in common elements. That matters in damage cases, insurance disputes, repair fights, and standing disputes. For HOA boards and counsel, Shelby strongly supports representative litigation by the…

Federoff matters whenever a community is dealing with old restrictions and a buyer or developer claims the covenant disappeared because it was omitted from a later deed. In Arizona, omission alone is not always enough. For HOA counsel, the case underscores the importance of title review and record notice. For owners,…

Duffy is still useful in modern HOA litigation whenever parties argue over whether an amendment was adopted under the right document and by the right vote. It reminds boards that the declaration usually sits at the top of the governing-document hierarchy for land-use restrictions. For homeowners, Duffy cuts both ways.…

Decker is one of Arizona’s strongest pro-enforcement covenant cases. It warns owners and builders that charging ahead after notice can lead to demolition-type remedies, not just damages. For boards and counsel, the case is useful when a violator argues that the surrounding area has become more commercial or that teari…

Palermo remains highly useful in HOA and subdivision litigation where one side claims there was a broad neighborhood scheme but the documents are thin or inconsistent. It is a drafting and title case as much as an enforcement case. For modern communities, Palermo shows why declarations need clarity. If the document do…

Murphey is still useful in HOA cases where an owner argues that the neighborhood has changed, the property would be more valuable if unburdened, or current zoning makes the covenant unnecessary. Arizona law does not treat those points as enough by themselves. The case also remains significant for architectural-review…

Condos is valuable whenever a homeowner defends a violation by pointing to unrelated noncompliance elsewhere in the community. Arizona courts look for abandonment of the relevant plan, not just a grab bag of different violations. The case is also a reminder that public permits and licenses do not automatically cure a…

Whitaker is still a key answer to the common homeowner defense that the HOA or a neighbor missed other violations, so enforcement is now impossible. Arizona law is more nuanced than that. Boards should still strive for consistent enforcement, but Whitaker helps explain why imperfect past enforcement does not always de…