Sagamore Estates Property Owners Ass'n v. Sklar
81 A.3d 981
Pa. Super. Ct.2013Background
- Sklars purchased property in Sagamore Estates on September 20, 2003.
- SEPOA alleged the Sklars erected a dock in Big Twin Lake on May 27, 2006, infringing SEPOA's implied easement.
- SEPOA obtained injunctive relief in 2008; this Court affirmed in 2009.
- Trial court on November 20, 2012 ordered fines of $15,675 and attorney’s fees of $19,343.79.
- Sklars appealed, challenging the fines as premised on rules not yet established and seeking appellate review; judgment entered March 14, 2013.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether SEPOA had authority to impose fines for the dock placement. | Sklars: fines unavailable for violations of rules not duly established. | SEPOA: fines authorized under UPCA §5302 and bylaws Article 8(g) for violations of duly established rules/bylaws. | Yes; fines authorized for violations of duly established bylaws and rules. |
| Whether attorney’s fees were properly awarded alongside the fines. | Sklars: if fines improper, attorney’s fees improper. | Because fines were proper, fees under UPCA §5315(g) were proper. | Affirmed; fees proper as prevailing party under §5315(g). |
Key Cases Cited
- J.C.B. v. Pennsylvania State Police, 35 A.3d 792 (Pa. Super. 2012) (statutory interpretation standard of review; plain meaning governs)
- Purcell v. Milton Hershey School Alumni Ass’n, 884 A.2d 372 (Pa. Commw. 2005) (bylaws interpreted by plain meaning; nonprofit bylaws treated like statutes)
- Towey v. Lebow, 980 A.2d 142 (Pa. Super. 2009) (appellate jurisdiction distinctions clarified in interlocutory contexts)
- Zikria v. Western Pennsylvania Hosp., 447 Pa. Super. 80, 668 A.2d 173 (1995) (judicial economy considerations in nonprofit-corporation appeals)
- Prime Medica Associates v. Valley Forge Ins. Co., 970 A.2d 1149 (Pa. Super. 2009) (jurisdictional and procedural precedents on final judgments)