Moretto v. Elk Point Country Club Homeowners Ass'n, Inc.
Zephyr Cove, Douglas · NV · Supreme Court of Nevada
MIXED · architectural
What happened
In 2018 Elk Point's board adopted an architectural review committee and detailed Architectural and Design Control Standards restricting heights, setbacks, lighting, materials, and landscaping on individually owned lots. Lot owner Jerome Moretto sued to invalidate the guidelines; the district court granted summary judgment for the association. The Nevada Supreme Court (Apr. 7, 2022) affirmed authority but reversed for a reasonableness inquiry.
What the court (or agency) held
The Nevada Supreme Court adopted Restatement (Third) of Property: Servitudes §§ 6.7 and 6.9 and held that while Elk Point's bylaws gave the association express power to adopt design-control restrictions on individually owned lots, that power must be exercised reasonably. Because reasonableness was not litigated below, the Court reversed summary judgment for the HOA on Moretto's declaratory-relief and property-rights claims and remanded for a reasonableness determination—leaving authority intact pending that inquiry.
Why this matters for members
This result is MIXED — a partial win, not a clean sweep on every claim. Detailed guidelines adopted under an express design-control covenant still face reasonableness review. Owners challenging guidelines should develop a factual record on deliberation, consistency, and departure from prior standards—not only a pure ultra vires theory.
What the member did
Sued for declaratory relief challenging the newly adopted architectural guidelines as beyond the association's power, and appealed summary judgment.
What did not work
A pure "no authority at all" theory failed; the Court found express bylaw authority but required a reasonableness inquiry on remand.
Questions for the board
- Before adopting height/setback/lighting guidelines, what community plan and fairness analysis was recorded?
- Are guidelines applied consistently across similarly situated lots?
- Was membership given meaningful notice of how the new standards change prior practice?
Questions for a lawyer
- How should Grovenburg-style reasonableness factors be tried on remand?
- Who bears the burden shift after a prima facie unreasonableness showing?
- What claims survive if only some guideline provisions are unreasonable?
Citation
Moretto v. Elk Point Country Club Homeowners Ass'n, Inc., 138 Nev. Adv. Op. 24, 507 P.3d 199 (2022); No. 82565 (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.