|
July 26, 2007
|
Case No: A-118/122 - Copmmittee for Twin Rivers vs Twin Rivers HOA
|
|
New Jersey
Other Court
Branch: New Jersey Supreme Court
|
COMMITTEE FOR A BETTER TWIN RIVERS (CBTR); DIANNE MCCARTHY; HAIM BAR-AKIVA and BRUCE FRITZGES
Represented by: Barry S. Goodman , Frank Askin
v.
TWIN RIVERS HOMEOWNERS' ASSOCIATION (TRHA); TWIN RIVERS COMMUNITY TRUST and SCOTT POHL (TRHA PRESIDENT)
Represented by: Michael S. Karpoff
CAI Member
|
Summary
In this appeal, we determine whether the rules and regulations enacted by a homeowners' association governing the posting of signs, the use of the community room, and access to its newsletter violated our state constitutional guarantees of free expression. The trial court held that the association's rules and regulations were not subject to the right of free speech embodied in our State Constitution. On appeal, the Appellate Division reversed. We granted certification and now reverse the judgment of the Appellate Division.- Opinion by New Jersey Justice Wallace. Concurred by Chief Justice Zassali, Justices Long, LaVecchia, Albin, Rivera-Soto, and Hoehns
|
|
|
Causes of Action: In this appeal, we determine whether the rules and regulations enacted by a homeowners' association governing the posting of signs, the use of the community room, and access to its newsletter violated our state constitutional guarantees of free expression. The trial court held that the association's rules and regulations were not subject to the right of free speech embodied in our State Constitution. On appeal, the Appellate Division reversed. We granted certification and now reverse the judgment of the Appellate Division. - Opinion by New Jersey Justice Wallace. Concurred by Chief Justice Zassali, Justices Long, LaVecchia, Albin, Rivera-Soto, and Hoehns
|
|
Judge: The Honorable Chief Justice Zazzali presiding, Justice Wallace opinion
|
Current information/Final Decision
Judgment of the Appellate Division is REVERSED and the judgment of the trial court is REINSTATED. CHIEF JUSTICE ZAZZALI and JUSTICES LONG, LaVECCHIA, ALBIN, RIVERA-SOTO and HOENS join in JUSTICE WALLACE'S opinion. |
|
Lawsuit Text
SUPREME COURT OF NEW JERSEY
A-118/122 September Term 2005
COMMITTEE FOR A BETTER TWIN RIVERS (CBTR); DIANNE MCCARTHY; HAIM BAR-AKIVA and
BRUCE FRITZGES,
Plaintiffs-Respondents,
and
EDWARD MCDONALD and EMILY MCDONALD,
Plaintiffs,
v.
TWIN RIVERS HOMEOWNERS' ASSOCIATION (TRHA); TWIN RIVERS COMMUNITY TRUST and
SCOTT POHL (TRHA PRESIDENT),
Defendants-Appellants,
and
JENNIFER WARD (TRHA ADMINISTRATOR),
Defendant.
Argued January 4, 2007 - Decided July 26, 2007
On appeal from and certification to the Superior Court, Appellate Division, whose opinion isreported at 383 N.J. Super. 22 (2006).
Barry S. Goodman argued the cause for appellants Twin Rivers Homeowners' Association and Twin Rivers Community Trust (Greenbaum, Rowe, Smith & Davis and Kennedy, Wronko & Kennedy, attorneys; Mr. Goodman and Karyn A. Kennedy Branco, of counsel; Mr. Goodman, Ms. Branco, Jane J. Felton and E. Richard Kennedy, on the briefs).
Michael S. Karpoff argued the cause for appellant Scott Pohl (Hill Wallack, attorneys).
Frank Askin, Counsel, Rutgers Constitutional Litigation Clinic, argued the cause for respondents, on behalf of American Civil Liberties Union Foundation of New Jersey.
Dennis R. Casale submitted a brief on behalf of amicus curiae Community Association Institute (Pepper Hamilton; Hueston, McNulty, Mueller & DeGonge and Nowell Amoroso Klein & Bierman, attorneys; Mr. Casale, Samuel J. McNulty and Thomas Martin, of counsel).
Frank L. Corrado, Special Counsel, submitted a brief on behalf of amicus curiae Public Advocate of New Jersey (Ronald K. Chen, Public Advocate of New Jersey and Barry, Corrado, Grassi & Gibson, attorneys).
Steven Siegel submitted a brief on behalf of amicus curiae AARP (Sokol, Behot & Fiorenzo, attorneys; Mr. Siegel, Franco A. Munoz and Susan Ann Silverstein, members of the District of Columbia bar, of counsel and onthe brief).
JUSTICE WALLACE, JR. delivered the opinion of the Court.
In this appeal, we determine whether the rules and regulations enacted by a homeowners' association governing the posting of signs, the use of the community room, and access to its newsletter violated our state constitutional guarantees of free expression. The trial court held that the association's rules and regulations were not subject to the right of free speech embodied in our State Constitution. On appeal, the Appellate Division reversed. We granted certification and now reverse the judgment of the Appellate Division.
See attached PDF for complete opinion
---------
SYLLABUS
(This syllabus is not part of the opinion of the Court. It has been prepared by the Office of the Clerk for the convenience of the reader. It has been neither reviewed nor approved by the Supreme Court. Please note that, in the interests of brevity, portions of any opinion may not have been summarized).
Committee for a Better Twin Rivers v. Twin Rivers Homeowners' Association (A-118-122-05)
Argued January 4, 2007 -- Decided July 26, 2007
WALLACE, J., writing for a unanimous Court.
The issue before the Court is whether the rules and regulations enacted by the Twin Rivers Homeowners' Association governing the posting of signs, the use of the community room, and access to its newsletter violated New Jersey's constitutional guarantees of free expression.
Twin Rivers is a planned unit development consisting of privately owned condominium duplexes, townhouses, single-family homes, apartments, and commercial buildings located in East Windsor, New Jersey. The community covers about one square mile and is populated by about 10,000 residents. The Twin Rivers Community Trust (Trust) is a private corporation that owns Twin Rivers' common property and facilities. The Twin Rivers Homeowners' Association (Association) is a private corporation that serves as trustee of the Trust. The Association is authorized by the Trust to make rules and regulations for the conduct of its members while occupying the land owned or controlled by the Trust, to provide services to its members, and to maintain common lands and facilities in Twin Rivers. The Association maintains the Trusts' private residential roads, provides street lighting and snow removal, assigns parking spaces in its parking lots, and collects trash. By acquiring property in Twin Rivers, the property owner automatically becomes a member of the Association and is subject to its Articles of Incorporation
(Articles) and Bylaws. The Association is governed by a Board of Directors (Board), whose members are elected by all eligible voting members of the Association. The Board is responsible for making and enforcing the rules, and for providing services to its members that are financed through mandatory assessments levied against residents pursuant to an annual budget adopted by the Board.
Prior to the start of this litigation, several residents of Twin Rivers formed a committee, known as the Committee for a Better Twin Rivers (Committee), in order to change the way in which Twin Rivers was governed.
Eventually, the Committee and three individual residents of Twin Rivers (collectively, the Committee) filed a nine- count complaint against the Association and Scott Pohl, the president of the Association, seeking to invalidate various rules and regulations. The Committee later amended its complaint to include the Trust as a defendant. The thrust of the complaint was that the Association had effectively replaced the role of the municipality in the lives of its residents and, therefore, the Association's internal rules and regulations should be subject to the free speech and free association clauses of the State Constitution. Only the first three counts of the complaint are relevant to this appeal.
In count one of the complaint, the Committee sought to invalidate the Association's policy relating to the posting of signs, which effectively limited signs to one per lawn, one per window and forbid the posting of signs on utility poles and natural features within the community. The stated purpose of the rule is to avoid the clutter of signs and to preserve the aesthetic value of the common areas, as well as to allow for lawn maintenance and leaf collection. The Committee sought injunctive relief to permit the posting of political signs on the property of community residents and on common elements under reasonable regulation on the basis that the current policy was unconstitutional.
In count two of the complaint, the Committee addressed the policy regarding the use of the community room. In general, the community room is open to residents of Twin Rivers as well as clubs, organizations, and committees approved by the Trust who want to rent the room for parties and other events. A rental fee was charged and the renter was also required to provide a certificate of insurance naming the Association as the insured. The rental fees were intended to cover the costs associated with the maintenance of the room. The Committee asserted that the community room policy denied them equal protection of the laws and unreasonably and unconstitutionally violated their right to access the community room on a fair and equitable basis. The Committee sought temporary and permanent injunctions to allow them to use the room as other similarly situated entities. They also stated that the rental fees were excessive and were not related to actual rental costs incurred by the Association.
In count three, the Committee alleges they were denied equal access to the Association's monthly newspaper, Twin Rivers Today (Today). The newspaper provides residents with news and information that concerns the community and the editorial committee of Today selects the content of the newspaper. The paper is delivered to all Twin Rivers residents but not to the general public. The Committee sought a declaration that all Twin rivers residents should have equal access to the pages of Today. The Committee also sought a permanent injunction enjoining the president of the Board from using the newspaper "as his own personal political trumpet."
The Association filed a motion for summary judgment and the Committee filed a cross-motion. The material facts were not disputed. The trial court granted the Association's motion for summary judgment on the sign claims in count one and on the newspaper claims in count three. The trial court granted partial relief to the Committee on the community room claims in count two. Central to the trial court's decision was the determination that Twin Rivers was not a quasi-municipality and was therefore not subject to the New Jersey Constitution's free speech and association clauses. The court noted that while the Association asserted considerable influence on the lives of Twin Rivers' residents, that impact was a function of the contractual relationship that residents entered into when they elected to purchase property in the community. The court applied the traditional test for evaluating the reasonableness of restrictive covenants and found that the covenant relating to the posting of signs was reasonable and enforceable. The court found the regulations relating to the use of the community room impermissibly vague and directed the Association to modify the regulations to provide clear standards for the granting or withholding of permission for the room's use. Further, the court concluded that the Committee was not denied access to Today and that it would be improper under constitutional principles of free press for the court to exert control over the newspaper's contents.
The Committee appealed. The Appellate Division reversed, holding that the Association was subject to State constitutional standards in respect of its internal rules and regulations.
The Supreme Court granted the Association's petition for certification on whether the New Jersey Constitution applies to its internal rules and regulations.
|
|
