Cypress on Sunland Homeowners Ass'n v. Orlandini
227 Ariz. 288
| Ariz. Ct. App. | 2011Background
- Intervenors appeal trial court orders consolidating the lien foreclosure and quiet title actions and denying a notice of change of judge.
- The lien foreclosure involved a HOA assessment lien superior to a first mortgage claim in dispute with the Bank and its assignees.
- The HOA obtained a default judgment on foreclosure after ex parte proceedings and misstatements about lien priority.
- Judicially discovered issues prompted intervention and counterclaims seeking to set aside the default judgment for fraud on the court.
- Converter consolidation after Judge Burke’s order set the stage for Commissioner Kongable’s reconsideration, which reinstated the default judgment and later led to fee disputes.
- The court ultimately vacated the nunc pro tunc reinstatement of the default judgment and fee awards, remanding matters for further proceedings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether consolidation was an abuse of discretion | Intervenors | HOA | Consolidation proper; common facts justify consolidation. |
| Whether denial of change of judge was proper | Intervenors | HOA | Issue not reviewed on appeal. |
| Whether the default judgment on foreclosure can be set aside for fraud on the court | Intervenors | HOA | Fraud on the court found; reversal of reinstatement. |
| Whether attorneys’ fees to HOA were proper | Intervenors | HOA | Fee award not supported; reversed and remanded. |
| Whether remaining issues should be remanded for lack of joinder/standing | Intervenors | HOA | Remand for further proceedings on unresolved issues. |
Key Cases Cited
- Hancock v. McCarroll, 188 Ariz. 492 (App. 1996) (abuse of discretion standard for consolidation)
- Villa De Jardines Ass’n v. Flagstar Bank, FSB, 227 Ariz. 91 (App. 2011) (statutory priority of liens over HOA claims; interpretation of §33-1807(B)(2))
- Rowland v. Kellogg Brown & Root, Inc., 210 Ariz. 530 (App. 2005) (statutory interpretation precedents; de novo review)
- Hibbs v. Calcot, Ltd., 166 Ariz. 210 (App. 1990) (new circumstances justify reconsideration of prior ruling)
- Hazel-Atlas Glass Co. v. Hartford-Empire Co., 322 U.S. 238 (Supreme Court 1944) (fraud upon the court may justify setting aside judgment)