Timbercreek Canyon Property Owners Association, Inc. v. Carl Fowler, 07-14-00043-CV

Background

Timbercreek Canyon subdivision created in late 1970s; developer conveyed roads to Timbercreek Canyon Property Owners’ Association in 1978 and the deed stated the association would assume road maintenance after Jan. 1, 1979.
The Village of Timbercreek Canyon incorporated in 1983 and used tax revenue to maintain roads until a 2001 judgment declared the roads private and enjoined the village from spending public funds on them.
Association adopted new bylaws in March 2009 declaring property owners members and authorizing the board to set annual dues; board set dues at $250 for 2010 and sent invoices. Fowler and other homeowners refused to pay; association sued for declaratory relief, breach of contract, equitable relief, and reimbursement for road maintenance.
Homeowners moved for summary judgment; trial court rendered a take-nothing summary judgment for homeowners and awarded $7,500 in attorney’s fees; association appealed.
Key evidentiary points: a 1978 HUD property report stated buyers were "required" to pay modest monthly fees; the report was not recorded in county real property records and was not shown to be incorporated into deeds; contemporaneous association communications and affidavits repeatedly characterized dues as voluntary.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the 1978 HUD property report created enforceable restrictive covenants obligating homeowners to pay dues	HUD report’s statement that buyers "are required" to pay constituted dedicatory instrument/restrictive covenant	The HUD report was not recorded as a dedicatory instrument and was not incorporated into deeds or homeowner contracts	HUD report could not operate as a dedicatory instrument because it was not filed in county real property records; no restrictive covenant shown in record
Whether an express contract obligated homeowners to pay association dues	The report or other instruments created an enforceable contract running with the land	No evidence that the HUD report or any deed or contract incorporated the payment obligation; no homeowner contract in record	No evidence of an express contract or incorporation; breach of express contract claim fails
Whether homeowners are liable in quantum meruit / unjust enrichment for road maintenance costs	Association rendered road maintenance with expectation of repayment; homeowners benefited and should pay	Evidence shows dues were treated as voluntary historically and homeowners were not notified they were expected to pay; association did not show notice/expectation	Quantum meruit and unjust enrichment claims fail for lack of notice/expectation and absence of circumstances creating unjust advantage
Whether awarding $7,500 in attorney’s fees to homeowners was proper	Award is inequitable because trial court did not state reasons	Trial court has discretion under Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 37.009; record supports reasonableness and necessity	No abuse of discretion; fee award affirmed

Key Cases Cited

Valence Operating Co. v. Dorsett, 164 S.W.3d 656 (Tex. 2005) (standard for de novo review of summary judgment)
Neely v. Wilson, 418 S.W.3d 52 (Tex. 2013) (summary judgment burdens and hybrid motions)
Buck v. Palmer, 381 S.W.3d 525 (Tex. 2012) (no‑evidence/summary judgment burden discussion)
City of Keller v. Wilson, 168 S.W.3d 802 (Tex. 2005) (review of summary judgment evidence in the light most favorable to nonmovant)
Mitchell v. LaFlamme, 60 S.W.3d 123 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2000) (treatment of restrictive covenants as contracts)
Davis v. Canyon Creek Estates Homeowners Ass’n, 350 S.W.3d 301 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2011) (restrictive covenants treated as contracts)
Bashara v. Baptist Mem’l Hosp. Sys., 685 S.W.2d 307 (Tex. 1985) (elements of quantum meruit)
Heldenfels Bros. v. City of Corpus Christi, 832 S.W.2d 39 (Tex. 1992) (unjust enrichment contexts)
Bocquet v. Herring, 972 S.W.2d 19 (Tex. 1998) (discretion in awarding fees under declaratory judgment statute)
Ridge Oil Co. v. Guinn Invs., Inc., 148 S.W.3d 143 (Tex. 2004) (limitations on fee awards; review for abuse of discretion)
Point Lookout West, Inc. v. Whorton, 742 S.W.2d 277 (Tex. 1987) (presumption that trial court made necessary findings when none are filed)
In re W.E.R., 669 S.W.2d 716 (Tex. 1984) (affirming on any legal theory supported by evidence)
Double Diamond, Inc. v. Saturn, 339 S.W.3d 337 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2011) (remand of fee award when summary judgment reversed)