Garden Lakes Community Association, Inc. v. Madigan
Avondale · AZ · Court of Appeals of Arizona, Division One
Member win · architectural
What happened
Homeowners in Garden Lakes (Avondale), including the Madigans and Speaks, installed solar energy devices. The association's architectural guidelines tightly regulated solar appearance/placement. The association sued; the homeowners defended under A.R.S. § 33-439(A), arguing the restrictions effectively prohibited solar. After trial, the superior court ruled for the homeowners. The Arizona Court of Appeals, Division One, affirmed (Feb. 18, 2003).
What the court (or agency) held
Under A.R.S. § 33-439(A), deed restrictions that "effectively prohibit" installation or use of solar energy devices are void and unenforceable. Whether guidelines (as written and as applied) effectively prohibit solar is a factual question; the trial court's homeowner-favorable finding was affirmed.
Why this matters for members
Arizona's solar statute looks past facial "reasonable regulation" language to whether rules effectively ban solar. Trial evidence about feasibility under the guidelines drove the outcome.
What the member did
Defended under A.R.S. § 33-439 and proved at trial that the association's restrictions effectively prohibited solar installation/use.
Questions for the board
- Do our solar guidelines, as written and as applied, leave owners a workable path to install functioning systems?
- Have we compared our guidelines to A.R.S. solar-protection statutes before denying applications?
- What written findings do we make when denying or conditioning a solar application?
Questions for a lawyer
- How do Arizona courts evaluate "effectively prohibit" under § 33-439 (and any later solar statutes) on facts like ours?
- What expert or installer evidence is typically used to show effective prohibition?
- Should we seek declaratory relief before installing if the association has threatened enforcement?
Citation
Garden Lakes Community Association, Inc. v. Madigan, No. 1 CA-CV 00-0570 (Ariz. Ct. App. Feb. 18, 2003) (2003-02-18). Court of Appeals of Arizona, Division One. Outcome chip: member_win. Source: https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/az-court-of-appeals/1320811.html
_General information, not legal advice. Outcomes turn on facts and current law._
General information, not legal advice. Outcomes turn on facts and current law.