Gagnesh Gupta v. Summit at Neptune Condominium Association

CourtNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division
DecidedJune 12, 2026
DocketA-3243-24
StatusUnpublished

This text of Gagnesh Gupta v. Summit at Neptune Condominium Association (Gagnesh Gupta v. Summit at Neptune Condominium Association) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Gagnesh Gupta v. Summit at Neptune Condominium Association, (N.J. Ct. App. 2026).

Opinion

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION This opinion shall not "constitute precedent or be binding upon any court ." Although it is posted on the internet, this opinion is binding only on the parties in the case and its use in other cases is limited . R. 1:36-3.

SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY APPELLATE DIVISION DOCKET NO. A-3243-24

GAGNESH GUPTA,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

SUMMIT AT NEPTUNE CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION,

Defendant-Respondent. ______________________________

Submitted April 15, 2026 – Decided June 12, 2026

Before Judges Gummer and Vanek.

On appeal from the Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Monmouth County, Docket No. DC-012549- 24.

Gagnesh Gupta, self-represented appellant.

Cutolo Barros, LLC, attorneys for respondent (Jaclyn M. Kavendeck, of counsel and on the brief; Carla Zappi, on the brief).

PER CURIAM Plaintiff Gagnesh Gupta acquired title to a condominium unit at a sheriff's

sale held after entry of a final judgment of foreclosure on a first mortgage.

Several months later, defendant Summit Avenue at Neptune Condominium

Association (the Association) billed him for outstanding monthly assessments

incurred by the prior owner. Plaintiff filed suit against the Association.

Plaintiff appeals an April 30, 2025 order granting summary judgment to

the Association, dismissing his complaint, and denying his summary judgment

motion. Based on N.J.S.A. 46:8B-21(e) and prevailing decisional law, we

reverse and remand for the entry of an order granting summary judgment in

favor of plaintiff, consistent with this opinion.

I.

We recount the salient, undisputed facts from the record. The

condominium unit at issue is governed by the Condominium Act, N.J.S.A.

46:8B-1 to -38, along with a Master Deed and By-Laws. The Master Deed states

each unit owner shall be a member of the Association and subject to the terms

of the Master Deed and By-Laws upon taking ownership.

The Master Deed states all unpaid assessments will constitute a lien

against the unit in favor of the Association. Beginning on September 24, 2014,

the Association recorded liens and lien amendments against the unit prior to the

A-3243-24 2 March 25, 2024 sheriff's sale. Each such lien referenced the Master Deed and

By-Laws.

On November 30, 2015, a bank filed a complaint seeking judgment of

foreclosure on a first mortgage. A lis pendens was recorded on December 29,

2015.

On November 7, 2019, a final judgment of foreclosure was entered. The

final judgment stated the foreclosure sale was subject to the six-month limited

priority rights of the Association as granted by the Condominium Act.

Plaintiff acquired title to the unit through a sheriff's sale, and the deed of

foreclosure was recorded in June 2024. In August 2024, the Association

demanded plaintiff pay $8,370, representing unpaid monthly assessments

accrued by the prior unit-owner. The Association's demand for payment

identified the outstanding amount as a priority lien pursuant to N.J.S.A. 46:8B -

21.

On September 23, 2024, plaintiff filed suit in the Special Civil Part ,

seeking declaratory and injunctive relief to remove the Association's pre-

sheriff's sale charges from his account pursuant to N.J.S.A. 46:8B-21(e), which

expressly exempts purchasers of property through a first-mortgage foreclosure

A-3243-24 3 sale from liability for unpaid common charges or assessments. Plaintiff's

complaint also sought damages.

After the Association moved to dismiss plaintiff's complaint for failure to

provide discovery, plaintiff cross-moved for summary judgment. The

Association also sought summary judgment, seeking to dismiss the complaint.

The Association in its Statement of Material Facts corrected an error in its prior

calculation and asserted the amount due from plaintiff for condominium-

assessment liens from 2019 through 2023 was $6,465. Following oral argument,

the judge entered an April 30, 2025 order denying plaintiff's summary judgment

motion, granting summary judgment to the Association, and denying the

Association's motion for discovery sanctions as moot. The judge found plaintiff

was responsible for payment of the liens under decisional law and the Master

Deed.

As an "account correction," the Association imposed a $175 legal fee on

plaintiff after final judgment was entered. During the pendency of this appeal,

plaintiff paid $6,640 to the Association "under protest" to avoid negative credit

consequences.

A-3243-24 4 II.

Plaintiff contends both the $6,465 pre-title assessment and $175 post-

judgment legal charge are unenforceable against him under N.J.S.A. 46:8B-

21(e), which expressly exempts purchasers who acquire title through foreclosure

of a first mortgage from liability for unpaid assessments owed by the former unit

owner. Based on our de novo review, we agree plaintiff is not liable for the

$6,465 charge under the plain language of N.J.S.A. 46:8B-21(e).

We review an order deciding a summary judgment motion de novo,

applying the same standard used by the trial court. Samolyk v. Berthe, 251 N.J.

73, 77 (2022). A motion for summary judgment should be granted "if the

pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories and admissions on file,

together with the affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue as to any

material fact challenged and that the moving party is entitled to a judgment or

order as a matter of law." R. 4:46-2(c). We accord "no special deference to the

trial court's legal conclusions." Birmingham v. Travelers N.J. Ins. Co., 475 N.J.

Super. 246, 255 (App. Div. 2023).

The Condominium Act governs real property that is subject to the

condominium form of ownership. N.J.S.A. 46:8B-21 addresses liability for

unpaid condominium assessments. Subsection (a) allows associations to place

A-3243-24 5 a liens on units for unpaid assessments and subsection (b) affords that lien

limited priority over recorded mortgages and other liens, to the extent it does

not exceed an assessment amount against the unit owner for the six-month period

prior to recording. Subsections (c) and (d) impose joint and several liability on

the grantee and grantor for all unpaid assessments where there is a voluntary

conveyance of a unit.

N.J.S.A. 46:8B-21 specifically sets forth the following:

a. The association shall have a lien on each unit for any unpaid assessment duly made by the association for a share of common expenses or otherwise, including any other moneys duly owed the association, upon proper notice to the appropriate unit owner, together with interest thereon and any late fees, fines, expenses, and reasonable attorney's fees imposed or incurred in the collection of the unpaid assessment; provided however that an association shall not record a lien in which the unpaid assessment consists solely of late fees. Such lien shall be effective from and after the time of recording in the public records of the county in which the unit is located of a claim of lien stating the description of the unit, the name of the record owner, the amount due and the date when due. Such claim of lien shall include only sums which are due and payable when the claim of lien is recorded and shall be signed and verified by an officer or agent of the association.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

O'CONNELL v. State
795 A.2d 857 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 2002)
Hubbard Ex Rel. Hubbard v. Reed
774 A.2d 495 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 2001)
Highland Lakes Country Club & Community Ass'n v. Franzino
892 A.2d 646 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 2006)
Micheve v. Wyndham Place
851 A.2d 743 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 2004)
Cohen v. Southbridge Park, Inc.
848 A.2d 781 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 2004)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Gagnesh Gupta v. Summit at Neptune Condominium Association, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gagnesh-gupta-v-summit-at-neptune-condominium-association-njsuperctappdiv-2026.