Posey v. Leavitt
San Bernardino · CA · California Court of Appeal, Fourth District, Division Two
MIXED · architectural
What happened
Posey sued neighbors Leavitt whose deck/encroachment—approved by the association—affected his property interests. The trial court essentially treated association consent as defeating trespass/nuisance injunctive relief. The Court of Appeal reversed and remanded for a proper equitable injunction analysis under Christensen-type factors (innocence of encroachment, irreparable injury, relative hardship).
What the court (or agency) held
VERIFY / REMAND on injunction remedy. A homeowner may sue directly to enforce the declaration and is not blocked merely because the association approved a neighbor's improvement. Association approval does not automatically legalize an encroachment/nuisance onto another owner's exclusive-use area. Judgment against Posey was reversed and remanded for the trial court to exercise equitable discretion on injunctive relief (innocence of encroachment, irreparable injury, relative hardship). Not an automatic mandatory injunction.
Why this matters for members
This result is MIXED — a partial win, not a clean sweep on every claim. Association architectural approval is not a shield that extinguishes neighbor property/declaration claims. Courts must still run equitable injunction analysis rather than treating board consent as dispositive.
What the member did
Sued neighboring owners (and framed association approval as non-dispositive) to enforce property/declaration rights against an encroaching improvement.
What did not work
Trial outcome denying meaningful injunctive analysis—reversed for further proceedings, not an automatic mandatory injunction.
Questions for the board
- When approving a deck or improvement, is encroachment onto another owner's exclusive-use area checked?
- Are neighboring owners given notice before approvals that affect shared boundaries?
- Does approval language warn that it does not authorize trespass?
Questions for a lawyer
- What equitable factors favor or defeat a mandatory injunction after remand?
- How should claims be pled against neighbors versus the association?
- What survey/encroachment evidence is needed for irreparable-injury findings?
Citation
Posey v. Leavitt, 229 Cal. App. 3d 1236 (1991) (1991-05-02). California Court of Appeal, Fourth District, Division Two. Outcome chip: MIXED. Flags: MIXED, remand, VERIFY. Source: https://law.justia.com/cases/california/court-of-appeal/3d/229/1236.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.