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).
3
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).
4
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).
5
-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
6
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
7
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