Moretto v. Elk Point Country Club Homeowners Association, Inc.
Zephyr Cove, Douglas · NV · Supreme Court of Nevada
MIXED · architectural
What happened
Trustee Jerome Moretto challenged Elk Point Country Club HOA's 2018 adoption of architectural guidelines restricting individually owned lots. The district court granted the association summary judgment. On April 7, 2022, the Nevada Supreme Court adopted Restatement (Third) of Property: Servitudes §§ 6.7 and 6.9, found express bylaw design-control authority, but reversed summary judgment in part for a reasonableness determination on remand.
What the court (or agency) held
Nevada adopts Restatement (Third) of Property: Servitudes §§ 6.7 and 6.9: a common-interest association generally lacks inherent power to impose use/design restrictions on individually owned lots without express authorization, and design-control power must be exercised reasonably. Although Elk Point's bylaws expressly authorized design restrictions, the district court granted the association summary judgment without evaluating reasonableness. The Supreme Court reversed that summary judgment in part and remanded for reasonableness findings.
Why this matters for members
This result is MIXED — a partial win, not a clean sweep on every claim. Express design-control authority is necessary but not sufficient—reasonableness (investigation, consistency, relation to community plan) must still be litigated. Pure 'no authority' theories fail where bylaws contain approval-of-plans covenants.
What the member did
Sought declaratory/injunctive relief limiting the association's power to adopt architectural guidelines affecting individual lots and pressed reasonableness review on appeal.
What did not work
The court recognized express bylaw authority to adopt design rules; the member-favorable result is the remand requiring reasonableness scrutiny, not a final invalidation of the guidelines.
Questions for the board
- Where is express design-control authority written in the recorded declaration or bylaws?
- Were new Architectural Guidelines adopted with articulated reasons and consistent application standards?
- How do the new rules compare to preexisting community design practices?
Questions for a lawyer
- What facts make a prima facie showing that the guidelines are unreasonable under § 6.9 comment d?
- Does NRS Chapter 116's definition of 'declaration' change the analysis for this pre-1992 community?
- What discovery is needed on remand regarding deliberation and consistency?
Citation
Moretto v. Elk Point Country Club Homeowners Association, Inc., 138 Nev. Adv. Op. 24; No. 82565 (Nev. Apr. 7, 2022) (2022-04-07). Supreme Court of Nevada. Outcome chip: MIXED. Flags: MIXED, remand. Source: https://law.justia.com/cases/nevada/supreme-court/2022/82565.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.