The Glens at Pompton Plains Condominium v. Van Kleef (New Jersey)
The Glens at Pompton Plains filed a complaint against defendants based on their failure to pay common area maintenance. The defendants initially filed suite approximately two years prior against the association for “breach of fiduciary duty” which was dismissed with prejudice for failure to state a claim. The unit owners did not request ADR in that lawsuit. In the current case, the unit owners filed a motion seeking dismissal of the association’s case. The trial court dismissed the complaint and referred the case to ADR. It is the association’s position that the court erred in dismissing the complaint and that the defendant is not entitled to ADR.
The trial court referred to the Bell Tower v. Haffert case, a prior case in which CAI also filed an amicus brief, although the court ruled against CAI’s position. In interpreting the Bell Tower case, the court believed that an association is required to provide ADR since a dispute over the payment of common area maintenance is a “housing related dispute”. In New Jersey a “housing related dispute” is subject to ADR. The court took the position that since the Bell Tower case did not say that the dispute over common area maintenance is not subject to ADR, the court had the authority to do the same.
If the Appellate Division confirms the trial court’s decision, every instance where a unit owner raises an issue in their community and withheld common area maintenance, an association would be required to provide ADR. Additionally, withholding of maintenance would affect the financial viability of the association. In New Jersey, associations are required to pay the cost of ADR, so the allegation of a “housing related dispute” would be utilized by those persons not having the funds to pay maintenance and using their requests for ADR as a stall tactic.
Brief: CAI's Amicus Brief
Prior Ruling: Lower Court Decision
Status: Pending
CAI Amicus Brief Author: Michael Karpoff, Esq.
CAI Amicus Brief Review Committee: Stephen Marcus, Esq; Gary Kessler, Esq; Steven Sugarman, Esq; Richard Ekimoto, Esq.; Robert Diamond, Esq.