In re the Proposed Foreclosure of Claim of Lien, 741 S.E.2d 308

Starboard Association administers Starboard By The Sea Condominium, a 139-unit complex governed by the Unit Ownership Act and its Declaration and By-Laws.
The 1982 Phase V amendment added Building 33 and allocated Building 33 units a 1.06160% undivided interest in common areas.
In 2004-2007, the Board levied a special assessment for renovations, with a 2005 assessment for buildings 1-32 and a 2007 assessment for Building 33 at $54,000 per unit (later ratified at $54,000).
Respondents owned Unit B in Building 33 and challenged the assessments as not uniform and not properly budgeted or ratified.
The trial court found the 2007 Building 33 assessment invalid for not being uniform or pro rata, dismissing the foreclosure and awarding respondents fees.
The Court of Appeals vacated and remanded for further proceedings, and the Supreme Court affirmed in part, remanding for proceedings not inconsistent with the opinion.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the Building 33 2007 assessment was uniform and pro rata	Starboard argues assessments were a single pro rata plan for all units.	Johnson/Proffit contend the 2007 charge was not uniform or pro rata.	The 2007 assessment was invalid; foreclosure based on it was improper.
Whether the alleged implied contract theory was properly raised	Starboard could recover on an implied contract for assessments.	Implied contract theory was not pleaded or raised below and cannot be considered on appeal.	Implied contract theory not decided; not considered on appeal.

Dunes S. Homeowners Ass’n v. First Flight Builders, Inc., 341 N.C. 125 (1995) (statutory framework to ensure fair shared expenses in condo projects)
Oronoque Shores Condo. Ass’n No. 1 v. Smulley, 114 Conn. App. 233 (2009) (miscalculation of a valid assessment does not excuse payment)
James River Equip., Inc. v. Tharpe’s Excavating, Inc., 179 N.C. App. 336 (2006) (implied contract theory defined but not decided on appeal)