Federal judge overturns jury decision in Hayden, Idaho Christmas house lawsuit

万得福

A few months ago, we learned that Jeremy Morris prevailed on his lawsuit against his HOA. A jury agreed with Morris’ claims that his HOA opposed his elaborate Christmas display, and tried to stop him from buying his house, because they discriminated against Christians.
The court awarded Morris $75,000. But that holiday victory was short-lived.
The HOA appealed to federal court, and earlier this month, Idaho District Court Judge B. Lynn Winmill, (reportedly an appointee of Bill Clinton), overruled the jury and reversed the court’s decision.
Justice Winmill ruled that the HOA did not engage in religious discriminate against Morris — the HOA was merely respecting the rights of other homeowners of different faiths.
The Judge also decided that Morris is barred from future Christmas displays, and must reimburse the HOA for its attorney fees.
Morris vows to appeal to the Ninth Circuit Court.
Winmill also makes the case that, if the jury verdict were not overturned, the HOA should be granted a new trial, or damages awarded to Morris should be reduced to a mere $4.
The Judge’s reasons for the reversal are fully explained in the article referenced below, but here’s a brief preview of Winmill’s arguments:

• The pre-purchase letter Morris used as evidence of discrimination was not written by the board, and not ultimately approved by the board.
• The HOA was not discriminating against Christians, it was simply respecting the ‘religious pluralism’ of its community
• The reference to the Christmas display attracting ‘undesirables’ and strangers was merely a concern for neighborhood safety
• Morris’ own secret recordings show his ‘confrontational’ approach toward his neighbors
• Winmill was sympathetic to the HOA President’s testimony against Morris
• The HOA cannot be held responsible for the hostile actions of a non-board member
• The Christmas extravaganza broke a bunch of HOA rules
  

Source, with case reference:
Why an Idaho judge just undid the controversial Hayden Christmas house jury verdict
by Daniel Walters, The Inlander | April 08, 2019

---

Nevada Supreme Court upholds a bank’s rights to preserve a deed of trust to avoid losing its interest due to foreclosure of an HOA priority lienNevada Supreme Court
Two Supreme Court opinions hold that if a bank attempts to pay off the HOA priority lien, that’s enough to preserve the deed of trust on the property. In other words, the auction buyer of property at HOA foreclosure cannot expect to extinguish the lender’s lien, and get a mortgage-free house.
The decision should help eliminate perverse incentives for rushing to HOA foreclosure. Ditto for questionable deals where auction winners wind up with windfall real estate profits after paying off relatively small HOA liens.
That’s good news for banks, and potentially good news for home buyers and homeowners.
Now, if only the courts would rule that when a homeowner makes an attempt to pay off the assessment portion of a lien, the HOA or its collection agent must accept it and must not proceed with HOA foreclosure, in an attempt to shake down the homeowner for thousands in attorney fees.
Any Nevada attorneys willing to take on this legal challenge? ♦
Source article with links to case references:
Nevada Supreme Court Rules Bank Tender Defeats HOA Superpriority Lien
by Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP (April 4, 2019)
Published Nevada Supreme Court Cases:
Bank of America v. SFR Investments Pool 1
Bank of America v. Thomas Jessup