Royal Gardens Homeowners Assoc. v. Smith

• Court: Superior Court of Guam
• Decided: September 12, 2024
• Docket: CV0473-21
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

ZLEQ "*',¢*'§,R¥¥'§t§< COG.;'s QF £%UA?¢%

2521 SE?1212 PH 202~ SEP ?H 3: 3: 56

CLERK CL[m~ UF OF CUURT C'fJURT

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT COURT OF OF GUAM GUAM BY: r,..,..~------- ROYAL ROYAL GARDENS GARDENS I-IONIEOWNERS HOMEOWNERS CIV1L CIVIL CASE NO. CV0473-21 ASSOCIATION,

Plaintiff, DECISION AND ORDER vs. GRANTING SUIVHVIARY JUDGMENT SUMMARY JUDGMENT CLAYTON C. c. SMITH, SMITH,

Defendant.

This matter matter is before the Honorable Honorable Dana Dana A. Gutierrez Gutierrez upon a Motion Motion for for Summary Summary

Judgment ("MSJ") filed by Plaintiff Judgment ("MSJ") Plaintiff Royal Royal Gardens HomeownersAssociation Gardens Homeowners Association("Homeowners"). ("Homeowners").

Attorney Duncan G. G. McCully McCully represents Homeowners. Defendant represents Homeowners. DefendantClayton Clayton C. C. Smith Smith("Smith") ("Smith") has has

appeared in this appeared in this matter matterpro pro Se. Upon review se. Upon review of applicable applicable Guam law, the Court hereby hereby GRANTS GRANTS

Homeowners' MSI. Homeowners' MSJ.

BACKGROUND

On On June 4,2021, June 4, 2021,Homeowners Homeownersfiled filed a Complaint Complaint against Smith, Smith, alleging alleging that Smith owned

Unit Unit No. No. 8-4 8-4 ininRoyal RoyalGardens Gardens Condominiums Condominiums (the "Condo"). 1 Homeowners (the "Condo").1 Homeowners claimed that it had

levied levied certain certain charges charges and and assessments for the assessments for the period up to and including March 15, 15, 2021 2021 in the

amount of $7,116.49 amount of plus such $7,116.49 plus such other other amounts amounts which which may may accrue after. Complaint accrue after. at 2. Complaint at 2.

Homeowners statedthat Homeowners stated thataaNotice Noticeof of Lien Lien ("Lien") ("Lien")was wasrecorded recordedagainst against the the Condo Condo for for unpaid unpaid

assessments. Id Homeowners further alleged assessments. Id. alleged that, that, despite despite demanding payments, Smith demanding the payments, Smith failed failed

'1 In In aa later later tiling, filing, Homeowners Homeowners described the Condo Condo more more fully fully as as "Lot "Lot No. 8-4, Block Block 6, 6, Tract No. 1314, 1314, Municipality MunicipalityofofTamuning." Tamuning."Courtney's Courtney'sDecl. Deel.atat11(Jan. (Jan. 23, 2024). -DECISION AND ORDER -DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING GRANTING SUMMARY SUMMARY JUDGMENT CV0473-21; V0473-21; Royal Gardens Homeowners Association Association vs. vs. Clayton Clayton Smith

to satisfy satisfy the the Lien Lien and that that other charges charges had had since accrued. Id. since accrued. In its Id In its Complaint, Complaint, aside aside Hom from

requesting an requesting an order to to have have aa lien lien in in the the amount of judgment judgment on the Condo and that the lien be

foreclosed and foreclosed and sold sold to to satisfy the judgment, Homeowners asked asked to to be be "granted "granted judgment judgment on its

claim against [Smith] for the the fees, fees, late late charges, charges, attorney attorney fees fees and and costs owed to costs owed to [Homeowners] [Homeowners] ..

. 117 ." IId.

On January 24, 2022, the Clerk of Court entered default against Smith due to his failure to

answer or otherwise appear in in the the matter matter in in aa timely timely manner, manner, and and Homeowners Homeowners subsequently filed

a Motion for Default Judgment on February February 24, 2022. However, Smith appeared appeared at the Default Default

Hearing on May Hearing May 10, 10, 2022 2022 and and requested requested additional additional time time to obtain obtain an an attorney, attorney, to which to which

Homeowners did Homeowners object, and which did not object, which the the Court Court granted. granted. Acer After several several continued continued Default Default

Hearings,2 the Headngs,2 the Court Court permitted permitted Smith Smith one one final final deadline deadline to to answer answer Homeowners' Homeowners' Complaint, but

Smith failed to do so. See Smith See Amended Order After Amended Order After Hearing Hearing (Sept. (Sept. 2, 2022).

November 7, However, on November 7, 2022, Homeowners Homeowners withdrew withdrew its its Motion Motion for for Entry Entry of of Default Default

Judgment due to "the initiation Judgment initiation by Pentagon Federal Credit Union to foreclose by exercise of of its

private power of sale of its first omits firstmortgage mortgageon on[the [theCondo] Condo]... ... [which] will cause the [Homeowners' [Homeowners

Lien] to be cut Lien] cut off off and and void void and and the the collectability collectability of of its claim for unpaid common area area fees, fees,

assessments, costsand assessments, costs andattorney attorney fees fees to to bebe uncertain." uncertain." WithdrawalofofMotion Withdrawal of Default Entry of forEntry Motionfor

Judgment at 1. I.

3 On January 23, 23, 2024, 2024,3 Homeowners Homeowners filed filed its its MSJ, MSJ, Memorandum Memorandum of of Law Law ("MSJ ("MSJ Memo"), Memo"),

2 Smith attended Default 2 Smith attended Default Hearings on May 10,10, 2022, 2022, June June 14, 14, 2022, September September 1, 2022, and October 5, 2022. Smith failed to appear at aa Default appear at Default Hearing Hearing on August 23, 2022.

33 In In its November 7, 2022 2022 Withdrawal Withdrawal of Motion Motionfor forEntry EntryofofDefault DefaultJudgment, Judgment,Homeowners Homeownersrequested requested a to be status hearing to heheld heldin insix six months. months. At May 16, At theMay 16, 2023 Hearing, for 2023 Status Hearing, for which Smith Smith did did not not appear, appear, informed the Homeowners informed the Court Court that that the thestatus statusof itsclaim ofits claim was wasstill still pending, and and that that itit intended intended toto file file a motion motion for summary judgment when summary judgment whenviable. viable.Min. Min. Entry, Entry, 9:24 AMAM (May (May 16,16, 2024). 2024).

2 DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT CV0473-21;Royal CV0473-21; RoyalGardens GardensHomeowners HomeownersAssociation Association vs. vs. Clayton Clayton Smith

and Declaration Declaration of of Rodney RodneyCourtney CourtneyininSupport Supportof ofMSJ MS]("Courtney's ("Courlney's Declaration"). Despite being

MSJ and accompanying served with the MS] accompanying documents, documents, Smith Smith did did not not file file an an opposition. See Deel. of Decl. of

Mailing (Jan. Mailing (Jan. 25, 2024).

Attorney McCully and Smith Smith appeared at aa Status appeared at Status Hearing on on March March 19, 2024. 4 At the 19, 2024.4

hearing, Homeowners stated that Smith no longer Homeowners stated longer owned owned the the Condo Condo as as the the first first mortgage in favor

of Pentagon Federal Credit Union of Union was was foreclosed, foreclosed, effectively effectively cutting cutting off off Homeowner's Homeowner's lien. Min.

(Mar. 19, Entry, 9:13 AM (Mar. 19, 2024). 2024). Accordingly, Accordingly, Homeowners Homeowners stated stated that that they they are are now solely solely

seeking a judgment judgment against Smith "for the common area fees." Id. common area

Furthermore, Furthermore, the Court noted that that Homeowners had had not not filed the the documents documents which are are

required to accompany accompany a motion for summary judgment in accordance with Local Rules of the

ofGuam Superior Court of Guam Rule Rule CVR CVR56.1, 56.1,including includinga astatement statementofofthe theissues issues to to be be decided decided and and a

statement of undisputed statement undisputed material material facts. facts. As As such, such, the the Court Court allowed allowed Homeowners Homeowners to file the to file the

requisite documents and allowed Smith requisite Smith an an opportunity opportunity to to respond respond to to those those Filings. filings. Order After

Hearing (Mar. 19, 19, 2024).

March 22, On March 22, 2024, 2024, Homeowners Homeowners filed filed its its Statement Statement of ofIssues & Undisputed Issues &, Undisputed Material Material

Facts CVR 56.1. Facts Re CVR Again, despite 56.1. Again, despitebeing beingserved servedwith withHomeowners' Homeowners'filings, filings, Smith Smith did did not file file an

opposition or any opposition any other filing tiling in response response to to Homeowners' MSJ. MSJ. Deal. Deel. of of Mailing Mailing (March (March 22, 22,

4 The Court set a Status Hearing on March 19, 2024 due to confusion regarding how Homeowners' 4 The Court set a Status Hearing on March 19, 2024 due to confusion regarding how Homeowners' intended to proceed in the matter. matter. Despite having filed its MSJ Despite having on January MS] on January 23, 2024, Homeowners Homeowners also also filed filed aa second Motion for Entry of Default Judgment on January Motion for Entry of Default Judgment on January 30, 2024. However, the Clerk of Court's office issued of Court's office issued a Speed Memo on March 6, 2024, stating Speed stating that that itit was was returning returningHomeowners' Hom eowners' Motion Motion for for Entry Entry of Default Judgment "[ "[p]er Law FiFirm's p] er Law Request vi r m 's Request via email a em ai 3/3/4/24." 4/ Speed Memo at Speed Mem at 1.1. At the StStatus At t he Hearing, at us Hear Homeowners explained Homeowners explainedthat that itit intend intend to to proceed proceed on on their their MSJ, MSJ, and and that it was was not seeking seeldng default default judgment judgment at this time. time. Min. Min. Entry, 9: 1212AM AM (March 19, 19, 2024).

3 DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT CV0473-21; Royal Royal Gardens Gardens Homeowners Homeowners Association Association vs. vs. Clayton Smith

2024); see also Deck. 2024), Deel. of of Electronic Electronic Mailing (March 22, Mailing (March 2024). 5 22, 2024).5

DISCUSSION

Summary judgment judgment is is proper "if the movant proper "if movant shows shows that that there is no genuine genuine dispute dispute as to

any material fact and the fact and the movant movant is entitled entitled to to judgment judgment as as aa matter matter of of law." law." Guam R. Civ. P.

56(a). "A genuine ("GRCP") Rule 56(a). genuine issue issue of of material fact exists exists when when there is sufficient evidence evidence

to establish factual dispute establish a factual dispute that that must must be be resolved resolved by by a fact-finder." fact-finder." Camacho Camacho v.v. Perez, Perez, 2017

Guam 161] (citing u k Corp. v. Kawasho 16,i 12 (citinglizukaCorp. Inf 'I (Guam), Inc., 1997 Guam 10i17). Kawasholnt'l 101]7). "Amaterial "A material

fact is is one one that is is relevant relevant to to an an element element of of a claim claim or or defense defense and and whose existence might might affect

the outcome of the suit suit .... .... Disputes Disputesover overirrelevant irrelevantororunnecessary unnecessary facts facts will will not not preclude preclude a

grant of of summary judgment." j Gov of Guam v. Gutierrez, Gov 't of ,i Gutierrez, 2015 Guam 8 1126 (citing Gayle Gayle v. v.

Hemlani, em 2000 Guam Guam 25 25 1120) (quotations omitted). ,i 20) (quotations

When reviewing reviewing a motion motion for for summary judgment, "[the] court judgment, "[the] court must draw inferences and

view the evidence evidence in in aa light light most most favorable favorable to to the the non~moving non-moving party." Id. Id. "A "A movant bears the

initial burden to show that undisputed facts in the record support a prima prima facie facie entitlement entitlement to the

relief requested." Hawaiian Rock requested." Hawaiian Rock Products Products Corp, Corp. v. v. Ocean Haas., Hous., Inc., 2016 Guam 41]27. ,i 27. IfIf the

movant movant satisfies burden, the satisfies its burden, the burden burden shifts to to the the non-movant non-movant party to produce produce at at least least some

significant significant probative probative evidence evidence to support the pleadings. Bank Bank of ofGuam v. v. Flores, 2005 Guam 25

,i If, 1]7. If, however, however, there are are no no genuine genuine issues of material fact, fact, the the non-movant non-movant may not simply rely

on allegations in the the complaint complaint but must must provide some significant significant probative evidence supporting supporting

the complaint. Gutierrez, Gutierrez, 2015 2015 Guam Guam8811 26. 126.

55 At At the the March March 19, 19, 2024 2024 Status StatusHearing, Hearing,Smith Smithconfirmed confirmedthat thathe hereceived receivedallallofofAttorney AttomeyMcCully's McCully's emails and that that he he did did not not wish wish totoprovide provide Attorney Attorney McCully McCul1y with with another form form of contact for for service. service. Min. Min. Entry, 9:26 A.M. (March (March 19, 19, 2024).

4 -DECISION AND ORDER -DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING GRANTING SUMMARY SUMMARY JUDGMENT CV0473-21; Royal Royal Gardens Gardens Homeowners Homeowners Association Association vs. vs. Clayton Smith

1. There There Are Are No No Disputed Disputed Facts

Despite ample opportunity to to do do so, so, Smith has has failed failed to to answer answer Homeowners' Homeowners' Complaint

and to respond to Homeowners' MSJ. Smith Homeowners' MSJ. Smith has has declined declined all all opportunities opportunities to dispute any of of the

material facts material facts presented presented by by Homeowners. Homeowners. Further, Further, neither neither Homeowners' Homeowners' Complaint nor MSJ

indicates, on its face, that any any material material disputed fact exists. See White v.v. Aramark, See White Aramark 670 Fed.Appx.

578 (9th Cir. 2016) (stating that summary judgment was proper because the "unopposed because the "unopposed motion motion

for summary judgment judgment demonstrated demonstrated the the absence absence of a genuine dispute of material fact . . ." aand

stating that the stating that the court court "may "may grant an unopposed motion motion for summary judgment iff tthe movant 's movant's

papers are are themselves themselves sufficient sufficient to to support support the the motion motion and do not on their their face face reveal a genuine

dispute of of material fact."). fact."). Therefore, Therefore, the the Court finds finds that there there is is no no genuine dispute of of material

fact. fact.

2. Homeowners Homeowners Have Have Demonstrated Thev They Are Are Entitled Entitled to to Judgment

Homeowners Homeowners state state that that Smith Smith has has owned owned the the Condo Condosince sinceJuly July9,9, 2018 2018 and and support support that that fact

by presenting the Warranty Deed signed signed by Smith Smith as as the grantee. Courtney's Courtney's DecL Deel. at at 11 and Ex. A.

The Warranty Warranty Deed outlines Smith's obligation to comply with the the "Declarations "Declarations of of Covenants,

Conditions Conditions and and Restrictions Restrictions for the Royal Gardens Gardens Townhouse Townhouse Subdivision, Subdivision,dated dated 09/ I 09/11/1990 and

recorded 09/12/90 under recorded 09/12/90 under document document number number 442107" 442107" ("Covenants"). (" Covenants" ). Id Id at at Ex. x. A. Homeowners

further attached a copy copy of the Covenants, which which requires requires that that each owner, by each owner> by acceptance acceptance of of a deed,

must must pay annual or or monthly monthlyassessments assessments or charges, special special assessment assessmentfor for capital capital improvements, improvements,

interest assessed by the the Homeowners Homeowners at one and one-half one-halfpercent percent(1 month, and reasonable (1.5%) per month, reasonable

attorneys' fees, and and common common area fees. fees. Id. Id at Ex. C.

Homeowners allege that Smith has not paid any common area area fees since November November 13, 13,

2020, and thus owe owe common common area area fees, fees, l late ate fees, fees, and iinterest. nterest. Homeowners Homeowners have i ncl uded aa

5 5 DECISION AND AND ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT CV0473-21, CV0473-21; Royal Royal Gardens Gardens Homeowners Homeowners Assoeialion Association vs. vs. Clayton Smith

of the fees which Smith breakdown of Smith owes owes as as well well as as a spreadsheet stating every fee due and every

payment made payment made toward toward his his balance since January January 1, 1, 2019. Seeid. 2019. See id at at Ex. Ex. EE and and Ex. Ex. G. G. The The common common

area fees fees amount amount to to $12,5700.00; S12,5700.00, common commonarea area late late fees amount amount to $1 ,075.00, and interest accrued $1,075.00; accrued

amounts to $8,440.92. See id. $8,440.92. See id at Ex. E. The The common common area area fees, fees, combined with with its its late late fees fees and

interest, amounts toto$22,085.92. interest, amounts $22,085.91 See id See id.

Homeowners also also state state that that on January January 12, 12, 2019, 2019, the the condominium and condominium owners voted and

approved a special approved special assessment assessment for for all all condominium of the condominium owners to fund painting the exterior of

buildings. Id. buildings. at 4--5. Id at Homeowners included 5. Homeowners included its its announcement announcement informing informing the condominium condominium

owners of of the meeting in which they voted voted and and the minutes minutes from that meeting. See id. id at Ex. and Ex.Hand

I. The Special Assessment fees amount amount to $3,878.73. See id. at Ex. E and Ex. G. id at

Additionally, Homeowners Homeowners include include aa copy copy of ofthe the legal legal costs costs charged. See id. at at Ex. F. The

legal costs amount to $767.94. See id. id.

Aside from monetary monetary relief, in its MSJ Homeowners Homeowners also also requested to be granted an order

lien in the to have a lien the amount amount of of judgment judgment on on the the Condo Condo and and that that the the lien lien be be foreclosed. foreclosed. Memo.

Law (Jan. 23, 23, 2024) 2024) at at 7. 7. However, However, at at the the March March 19, 2024 2024 hearing, hearing, Homeowners Homeowners informed the

Court that Pentagon Federal Credit Union foreclosed on its its first mortgage to the Condo, and that

Homeowners' Homeowners' Notice Notice of ofLien Lien was was cut cut off off and and void. void. See See Status Status Hr'g Hr'g Min. Min. Entry, Entry, 9:13 AM (Mar. (Mar.

19, 19, 2024), 2024); PTs Pl's Withdr. Mot. Mot. Entry Entry Defy Def. J. J. (Nov. 7, 7, 2022). Therefore, the Court cannot grant a

judgment to declare a lien on the Condo, and cannot foreclose judgment foreclose such a lien on the Condo. See id.

However, as noted in its Complaint, Complaint, Homeowners also sought a judgment judgment for the the common area area

fees fees against Smith. See against Smith. See 21 21 GCA GCA §45124 §45124 ("Suit ("Suit to to recover recover aa money money judgment judgment for for unpaid unpaid common common

expense shall be maintainable without foreclosing or waiving the lien securing the same.").

Based upon the the Court's Court's review of the Homeowners' Homeowners' evidence, evidence, the Court finds that Smith

6 DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT CV0473-21; V0473-21; Royal Gardens Homeowners Homeowners Association vs. Clayton Smith vs. Clayton

Homeowners $26,732.59. owes Homeowners $26,732.59.

CONCLUSION

Based a d onn the foregoing g o i n g reasons, r e a s o n s ,the t h eCourt C o u r tGRANTS G R A N T S summary u m m a r y judgment j u d g m e n t in i n favor v o r of

Ho me o wn e and awards Homeowners $26,732.59. Homeowners ,7 3 2 .5 9 Pla in tiff sshall Plaintiff h a ssubmit mit aa pproposed ropos me judgment

within 30 days of order, of this order.

soO ORDERED: S ORDERED: _ SEP-------+-1-6-2 __,,._S___,EP' 12 024 ~20~2~...-.-

H ( ORABLE 'AiA. GUT Ju e_Sut3erior Gourt\of Guam