CYPRESS ON SUNLAND HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION v. ORLANDINI
CYPRESS ON SUNLAND HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, a non-profit corporation; SCOTT JACOBY, an individual, Plaintiffs-Appellees,
v.
JAMES V. ORLANDINI, II; FIRST AMERICAN TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY, a California corporation, Intervenors-Appellants.
CYPRESS ON SUNLAND HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
JAMES V. ORLANDINI, II; FIRST AMERICAN TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY, a California corporation, Intervenors-Appellants.
Nos. 1 CA-CV 10-0142, 1 CA-CV 10-0235 (Consolidated).
Court of Appeals of Arizona, Division One, Department B.
May 19, 2011.
Excerpt:
* ¶44 Here, the HOA’s attorneys committed a fraud upon the court that justified setting aside the default judgment under Rule 60(c)(6).
First, the lien foreclosure complaint stated that there were two deeds of trust on the property but did not disclose that one of them was a first deed of trust. The complaint referred to § 33-1807(A) regarding creation of an assessment lien, and § 33-1807(H) regarding attorneys’ fees but did not refer to § 33-1807(B)(2) which plainly subordinates the assessment lien to a first deed of trust. The complaint falsely stated that the assessment lien had priority over all other liens.
Second, the judgment of foreclosure that the HOA lawyers presented to Commissioner McCoy to enter did not reflect that there was a first deed of trust on the property, nor did it refer to § 33-1807(B)(2) but merely stated that the assessment lien had priority over all other liens and falsely stated that the default judgment foreclosed all other liens, including the first deed of trust.
Third, although the complaint alleged that the CC&Rs gave the HOA a lien on the property which was perfected upon recordation, it did not refer to section 7.9 of the CC&Rs, which gave the first deed of trust priority over the assessment lien.
Finally, to obtain the default judgment, the attorney representing the HOA at the default hearing avowed to the court that the allegations set forth in the complaint and the proffered judgment of foreclosure were true and correct.
These material omissions and misrepresentations made in an ex parte proceeding prevented the commissioner from reaching an informed and impartial decision regarding entry of the default judgment, made it impossible for the court to properly perform its function of adjudicating the case in a fair and lawful manner, and harmed the integrity of the judicial process and the administration of justice.
Full opinion below…
~
4closureFraud.org
~
Cypress On Sunland Homeowners Association v. Orlandini
Anyone who would openly buy into a property that has a control on it as a home owners association is a fool.
And not a blind one at that, as it’s pretty obvious that property can only be used and accessed through the rule of a body who does not make the payments, pays the taxes, and does not maintain the property.
For every one of these there is another 100 that were foreclosed improperly.
these HOA Lawyers are worse than Foreclosure Lawyers and more people have to deal with their bullshit
Right on!!!Serves the HOA’S att. right for lying,cheating and attempting to steal.Now take down all the crooked lawyers and banks and we might actually start seeing some viable results.