Case Results

On June 8, 2011 the Denver District Court found in favor of an insurance company, represented by Ronald Nemirow and Christopher P. Brown, after a two day bench trial regarding a coverage dispute. The insurance company, through attorneys Nemirow and Brown, successfully argued that the claims submitted by the Defendant were not covered under the terms of the applicable policy. The judgment confirmed that the insurance company had no obligation to pay the $1.6 million claim and allowed it to recoup over $100,000 it spent in defense of its insured in an underlying proceeding.

In a trial ending on June 30, 2011, a Summit County jury sided with the defendant Homeowners’ Association in a case brought by a sub-association within the same community. The Plaintiff, representing more than one thousand time share interest holders, sued complaining that the dues structure for a luxury amenity in the mountain resort was improper, illegal and unjust. More than $1.2 million in damages were sought. After four days of jury trial in which three experts testified, the jury came back in favor Mr. Buckingham’s client. The claims, which had been brought under Colorado’s Common Interest Community Ownership Act (“CCIOA”), implicate a statutory right to attorneys’ fees for the prevailing party.

In April 2011, the United States District Court for the District of Colorado entered an order of summary judgment against all Federal Civil Rights claims brought against Mr. Buckingham’s physician client. The Court additionally declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the remaining state malpractice claims, and dismissed them. The case was brought by a prisoner through counsel alleging violations of the prisoner’s civil rights and medical malpractice against the physician. The Orders were entered granting Mr. Buckingham’s motion which incorporated the testimony of the incarcerated Plaintiff and several of the Plaintiff’s many specifically retained expert witnesses. The case, minus the Federal Claims, has been re-filed in the state courts where Mr. Buckingham successfully moved to have the venue shifted away from the urban district strategically chosen by Plaintiff’s counsel.

In December 2010, Miles Buckingham secured two critical orders for his Michigan-based manufacturing client. The first set aside the entry of a default judgment against the client which had been entered before counsel was retained. The second obtained a dismissal of all claims against the manufacturer on the basis of a lack of personal jurisdiction. Because the order was entered pursuant to Rule 12, the client was awarded its fees and costs incurred in defending the action. The orders were granted on two motions Buckingham filed as the initial filings of the manufacturer in a product defect/product liability suit brought in Weld County, Colorado.

A verdict for the defense came after a trial on the strongly contested claims of a former homeowner. The Plaintiff sued the homeowners’ association and its management company alleging impropriety in their efforts to collect on unpaid dues, assessments and attorney fees. The defendants, who were represented by Miles Buckingham, prevailed in a detailed findings of fact, conclusions of law and judgment entered by the Court after the trial to the bench.

In May 2013, attorney Miles Buckingham successfully defended a Jefferson County homeowners’ association and their management company against claims brought against them by two plaintiffs. The claimants alleged that the association and its manager failed to follow the rules and governing documents in the association in enforcing parking restrictions in the community, resulting in damage to their property. Plaintiffs’ counsel presented a spirited case to the Court, but the verdict favored the defendants who presented as witnesses the manager, the Board President, an involved resident and a representative of the company called upon to enforce the association’s rules.

On October 16, the Arapahoe County District Court entered summary judgment in favor of Miles Buckingham's client, an Aurora homeowners association, and against two Plaintiffs suing the association for more than two million dollars. Mr. Buckingham was lead counsel for the defense. Plaintiffs sued alleging several violations of state laws, and of association governing documents. Their lawsuit was challenged in a motion for summary judgment which used the Plaintiff's sworn testimony, and analyses of the Colorado Common Interest Ownership Act ("CCIOA"), to show that the Plaintiffs' claims were limited or barred. The Court preliminarily agreed with the summary judgment motion in June, but allowed the Plaintiffs to identify claims which survived the legal conclusions of the Court's preliminary order. After extensive argument, the Court ruled that the Plaintiffs' claims were adjudicated in their entirety, and judgment was entered in favor of the defense. The Association asked for, and received, a $46,000 judgment in favor of the Association, and against the Plaintiffs for fees and costs incurred in defending against the claims. In the past three years, Mr. Buckingham has obtained judgments for clients totaling more than $200,000.00 in attorney fees and costs in homeowners association cases.

Colorado law allows homeowners to demand documents from their HOA, and then sue for attorney fees and costs when they claim that they did not get what they asked for. Just such a suit was brought in Denver by a local homeowner who personally, and through counsel, made “repeated and escalating” demands to his HOA for all kinds of documents and records. The Plaintiff, who had made demands for compensation from the Association on prior occasions, filed suit after the Association, through attorney Miles Buckingham, refused to pay any of the thousands of dollars of claimed fees and costs incurred. The owner sued to force the Association to meet his demands. The matter was taken to trial, and the Association came through on top. After the verdict was read, Plaintiff walked out of the Courtroom without any award, and with all of his claims dismissed by the Court. Colorado homeowner associations should expect so see more of these types of cases as problem owners try to use Colorado law to convert their HOA into a source of cash.