426 S.W.3d 720
Mo. Ct. App.2014Background
- Coves North Homes Association appealed a trial de novo ruling in favor of the Schlers on a covenant breach claim.
- Schlers own a townhouse in Coves North Subdivision and sued for $6810–$7600 for exterior repairs to their patio, porch, and steps, plus fees; court awarded $7600 but denied fees and punitive damages.
- Declaration of Covenants assigns exterior maintenance to owners (Art. VI, §13) and exterior maintenance duties to the Association for certain items (Art. IV, §3(A)(2)(b)).
- Trial court found the Declaration did not preclude recovery by Schlers and awarded them damages; on appeal, Association challenges authority, interpretation, amended petitions, and expert testimony.
- Appellate court reverses the judgment, concluding patio, porch, and steps are not “exterior building surfaces” under Article IV, §3(A)(2)(b).
- Prior declaratory judgment action determined the Association is financially responsible for exterior maintenance under Article IV, §3(A)(2)(b) but did not interpret the article or declare specific repair obligations.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the court had authority over the equitable claim. | Schlers assert broader equitable relief; small claims court judgment precluded only; trial de novo allowed. | Association argues lack of authority for equitable relief. | Dispositive: authority lacking for equitable relief claim. |
| Whether patio, porch, and steps fall within exterior maintenance under Article IV §3(A)(2)(b). | Association must maintain exterior surfaces including patio/porch/steps. | Patio/porch/steps are not listed as exterior surfaces; not covered. | Patio/porch/steps are not exterior building surfaces; Association not obligated. |
| Whether amendments to petitions improperly added new claims. | Amendments clarified damages; allowed. | Amendments introduced new claims not heard in small claims. | Not addressed due to dispositive issue. |
| Whether Scarberry could testify as an expert. | Not addressed due to dispositive issue. |
Key Cases Cited
- Kehrs Mill Trails Assocs. v. Kingspointe Homeowner’s Ass’n, 251 S.W.3d 391, 251 S.W.3d 391 (Mo.App. E.D. 2008) (interpretation of covenants; affirmative covenants; contract principles apply to covenants)
- Hills v. Greenfield Village Homes Ass’n, Inc., 956 S.W.2d 344, 956 S.W.2d 344 (Mo.App.W.D. 1997) (affirmative covenant to provide exterior maintenance; contract interpretation guidance)
- Chochorowski v. Home Depot U.S.A., 404 S.W.3d 220, 404 S.W.3d 220 (Mo. banc 2013) (contract interpretation; determining parties’ intent from plain language)