Cynthia Hebert & James D. Hebert v. Spring Creek Easement Owners Association, 37215-4

Background

Spring Creek Easement Owners Association (HOA) was created by recorded covenants to maintain two private roads and impose obligations on parcel owners; covenants grant the association authority over road maintenance and the right to install gates.
Cynthia and James Hebert (owners of Lot 7) installed a permanent gate across Ridge Crest Road (within the recorded easement) and placed boulders along the road edge in mid-2000s; board minutes reflected only conditional/temporary approval pending written permission from third-party easement holders.
For years the gate and boulders remained; HOA contractor later reported snowplowing and maintenance impediments. In 2017 the HOA removed the boulders and gate, billed the HOA, and the HOA invoiced the Heberts for removal costs.
The Heberts sued the HOA for negligence and declaratory relief; HOA sued to foreclose a lien for unpaid assessments. The superior court consolidated the actions, granted HOA summary judgment, entered foreclosure, and awarded attorney fees.
On appeal the Heberts argued (among other points) that the covenants allowed the gate/boulders, that they had HOA permission, and that removal costs were wrongfully assessed; the court affirmed summary judgment for the HOA and awarded appellate fees to the HOA.

Issues

Issue	Hebert's Argument	Spring Creek's Argument	Held
Whether the covenants permit owners to install gates or place boulders in the easements	Covenants do not preclude owners from installing gates/boulders	Covenants grant HOA authority over road easements and to prohibit owner obstructions	Covenants construed to give HOA plenary power over roads; Heberts disallowed from obstructing easements
Whether the HOA granted permission for a permanent gate	Heberts say minutes/communications show HOA (and easement holders) approved a permanent gate	HOA says only conditional/temporary approval existed and no written permission from Plum Creek/Sapphire Skies was produced	No genuine fact issue: evidence shows only temporary/conditional approval; Heberts produced no written permission
Whether the gate/boulders unreasonably interfered with the easement, justifying removal and cost assessment	Heberts claim no unreasonable interference and removal was wrongful	HOA points to contractor testimony about impeded snowplowing, narrowed road width, and changing locks increasing costs	Undisputed evidence of interference; removal was justified and costs could be assessed against Heberts
Validity of foreclosure and attorney fees award for unpaid assessments	Heberts argued they need not pay removal-related assessments because removal was wrongful	HOA relied on covenants and statute authorizing assessments and fee recovery for enforcement	Summary judgment for HOA on foreclosure affirmed; contract and statute authorized assessments and attorney fees

Key Cases Cited

Viking Bank v. Firgrove Commons 3, LLC, 183 Wn. App. 706 (2014) (principles for interpreting restrictive covenants)
Grimwood v. University of Puget Sound, Inc., 110 Wn.2d 355 (1988) (affidavit must assert evidentiary facts, not conclusions)
Seven Gables Corp. v. MGM/UA Entertainment Co., 106 Wn.2d 1 (1986) (conclusory affidavits and speculation insufficient to defeat summary judgment)
Vacova Co. v. Farrell, 62 Wn. App. 386 (1991) (affidavits contradicted by attached documents may be disregarded)
Northwest Properties Brokers Network, Inc. v. Early Dawn Estates Homeowner’s Ass'n, 173 Wn. App. 778 (2013) (factors for determining whether a gate unreasonably interferes with a road easement)
Littlefair v. Schulze, 169 Wn. App. 659 (2012) (servient owner may use land so long as it does not interfere with easement's purpose)
Zonnebloem, LLC v. Blue Bay Holdings, LLC, 200 Wn. App. 178 (2017) (identifies easement holder and servient estate relationship)
State ex rel. Banks v. Drummond, 187 Wn.2d 157 (2016) (summary judgment standard application)