Wilson v. Playa de Serrano
Pima · AZ · Arizona Court of Appeals, Division Two
Member win · other
What happened
Playa de Serrano’s declaration described an adult townhouse development but did not enact a 55-and-older occupancy rule. In 2002 owners amended bylaws 25–6, posted 55+ signage, and sought to restrict occupancy accordingly. William Wilson sued for declaratory relief that the bylaw amendment could not impose a 55+ occupancy requirement on his townhouse. The trial court granted summary judgment to the association. On November 30, 2005, the Court of Appeals reversed and remanded for judgment for Wilson, including attorney fees.
What the court (or agency) held
Wilson won. A bylaw amendment alone was insufficient to impose a 55-and-older occupancy restriction where the declaration did not grant that contractual right. Judgment for the association reversed; remand with directions to enter judgment for Wilson and award reasonable attorney fees (including on appeal upon compliance with ARCAP 21).
Why this matters for members
‘Adult’ marketing language in a declaration is not a self-executing 55+ rule. Occupancy age limits generally must be authorized in the declaration (or properly amended declaration), not smuggled in through bylaws and signs. Owners can seek declaratory relief—and fees—when associations overreach.
What the member did
Sued for declaratory and injunctive relief and moved for summary judgment that occupancy limits must appear in the recorded declaration, not bylaws.
Questions for the board
- Does the recorded declaration expressly create a 55+ / housing-for-older-persons occupancy rule?
- Were any age limits adopted only by bylaw vote or signage without a declaration amendment?
- What fair-housing ‘housing for older persons’ criteria does the community claim to meet?
- Have owners been told bylaws alone can change occupancy age rules?
Questions for a lawyer
- Under Wilson, can this association’s bylaws impose 55+ occupancy without declaration authority?
- What declaration-amendment steps would be required to adopt a lawful age restriction?
- How do Arizona and federal fair-housing older-persons rules interact with declaration silence?
- What fee recovery is available after a declaratory judgment for the owner?
Citation
Wilson v. Playa de Serrano, 211 Ariz. 511, 123 P.3d 1148 (App. 2005); No. 2 CA-CV 2005-0072 (2005-11-30). Arizona Court of Appeals, Division Two. Outcome chip: fees/assessments hub / secondary. Flags: remand. Source: https://hallapproved.com/az/cases/appeals/2005/2634754/
_General information, not legal advice. Outcomes turn on facts and current law._
General information, not legal advice. Outcomes turn on facts and current law.