Southern Walk at Broadlands Homeowner's Ass'n v. OpenBand at Broadlands, LLC
713 F.3d 175
| 4th Cir. | 2013Background
- Southern Walk sues OpenBand for declaratory relief alleging the FCC 2007 Exclusivity Order renders its exclusivity rights unenforceable.
- TSA and an exclusive easement obligate Southern Walk to fund OpenBand platform services for all residents.
- FCC Exclusivity Order bans exclusive access clauses for video services in multi-dwelling developments; DC Circuit upheld the Order in 2009.
- Southern Walk argues the exclusivity scheme from TSA and Easement violates the Exclusivity Order and state law.
- District court dismissed the complaint with prejudice, ruling Southern Walk lacked standing and merits lacked support; fee issue later followed.
- This appeal concerns standing, dismissal without prejudice vs with prejudice, and OpenBand’s attorneys’ fees request under the TSA.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Standing in its own right | Southern Walk argues it suffers injury due to exclusivity | OpenBand contends no personal injury to Southern Walk from the exclusivity | No standing in own right; injury not redressable by declaratory relief. |
| Representational standing | Southern Walk asserts injury to its members warrants standing | Requirement Summers v. Earth Island Inn. applies; no identified harmed member | No representational standing; Summers requirement not satisfied. |
| Dismissal with prejudice vs without prejudice | Dismissal with prejudice was improper for lack of jurisdiction | District court properly dismissed under lack of standing | Dismissal affirmed as to lack of standing but without prejudice on remand. |
| Attorneys’ fees under TSA | OpenBand seeks fees as prevailing party | Dismissal precludes prevailing-party status | Fees denied; dismissal for lack of jurisdiction cannot create prevailing-status. |
Key Cases Cited
- Summers v. Earth Island Inst., 555 U.S. 488 (2009) (requires specific member harm for representational standing ( Summers identification rule))
- Md. Highways Contractors Ass’n v. Maryland, 933 F.2d 1246 (4th Cir. 1991) (organic standing prerequisites for organizational plaintiffs)
- White Tail Park, Inc. v. Stroube, 413 F.3d 451 (4th Cir. 2005) (standing deferential review of pleadings and attached exhibits)
- NAACP v. Alabama ex rel. Patterson, 357 U.S. 449 (1958) (all-members harm exception to Summers (limited))
- Car Carriers, Inc. v. Ford Motor Co., 745 F.2d 1101 (7th Cir. 1984) (illustrates limitations on amendment of pleadings via counsel)
- Semtek Int’l Inc. v. Lockheed Martin Corp., 531 U.S. 497 (2001) (dismissal without prejudice; impact on subsequent actions)
- Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Env’t, 523 U.S. 83 (1998) (jurisdictional dismissals do not reach merits)
- Buckhannon Bd. & Care Home, Inc. v. West Virginia Dep’t of Health & Human Resources, 532 U.S. 598 (2001) (prevailing party standard for fee-shifting)