High court sides with homeowner association police over resident - Chicago Tribune:
Last year, an appeals court found that the association could not stop and detain drivers for violating homeowners association rules. The court found that Lake Holiday could be found liable for Poris' false imprisonment claim and that the association's use of amber-colored flashing lights on its squad cars was unlawful.
But the Illinois Supreme Court on Friday reversed each of those findings, ruling that Lake Holiday was allowed to enforce its bylaws against residents and that courts "generally do not interfere with the internal affairs of a voluntary association."
"We can discern no logic in allowing a private homeowners association to construct and maintain roadways but not allowing the association to implement and enforce traffic laws on those roadways," Judge Robert Thomas wrote.
-----------
If you needed another reason to avoid homeowners' association, here you have it. Now in Illinois HOA employees dressed like cops can pull you over with flashing lights and give you a ticket. The line that courts "generally do not interfere with the internal affairs of a voluntary association" is horrifying in this context. I will have more on this, including a link to the opinion, later.
UPDATE: 1/27/13: Here is the link to the opinion at the Illinois Supreme Court website.
Second Update: 1/28/13: You can watch the oral argument at this link. Just scroll down to the case of Poris v. Lake Holiday POA.
7 comments:
Did they cite the California Supreme Court's 1999 ruling in Lamden v. La Jolla Clubdominium Assn, wherein the court similarly deferred to the "presumed expertise" of the HOA. If you have an issue with the HOA constabulary, too bad Business judgment rule trumps all in Privatopia.
ATTN George Starpoli: Sound the Privatopia as sovereign principality constitutional alert.
Wow, legalize the brown shirts in privatopia....what a moronic decision!
This is beyond the pale. Wonder if this means that the court would likewise agree that HOA boards and agents can be held liable under 1826 violations
No doubt the community association industry is jumping for joy, however, I think as this decision is circulated and the industry encourages this type of conduct there will be a massive devaluation of HOA properties as informed buyers will avoid a private police state.
What a dumbass decision.
Incredibly, Judge Thomas writes "We can discern no logic in allowing a private homeowners association to construct and maintain roadways but not allowing the association to implement and enforce traffic laws on those roadways."
How about starting with the fact and the legally correct position that corporation bylaws, resolutions, and restrictive covenants are NOT traffic laws.
This is so far down the path of despotism it seems unlikely that a court this ignorant (or perhaps corrupt) would change its position in response to a request for rehearing. Given the number of Illinois elected officials serving time (or that have served time) for political corruption is it possible that this outcome is a result of political corruption rather than logical reasoning?
So now any HOA in Illinois can appoint anybody they choose as "security" personnel, who can stop and detain you for violation of HOA traffic rules. In this case, the county had years ago accepted responsibility for enforcing traffic laws on the private streets of this subdivision. Questions: What happens when somebody refuses to stop? What happens if they stop but refuse to accept a citation? What happens when one of these HOA Barney Fifes decides to use some degree of physical force? These situations seem inevitable to me but I don't see any indication that the court has thought them through. I see no real understanding of what HOAs are all about and how they are different than other not for profit corporations. The cases they cite do not display any understanding of the law in other states. I see the potential for problems down the road as a result of this judicial endorsement private law enforcement by unlicensed, untrained, "officers."
Yea, like in Florida when the "go to guy" for security in an HOA shot an unarmed kid to death...after following him around because of his "suspicious" race.
Although..I did watch the oral argument in this case..and Mr. Poris did an extremely poor job of advocating his position.
While the HOA attorney actually testified that Mr Poris "should leave" if he didn't like it..
Another legal decision resulting from a perfect storm of stupidity..which is so common in these places.
I'm a little confused. If the bogus cop pulls over someone that is not an owner, then even under the ridiculous Supreme Court view it sounds like there is no defense to a cause of action for false imprisonment, false arrest, etc. So perhaps this situation will resolve itself when the bogus cop pulls over someone that is not one of the involuntary members.
And that is just off the top of your head no doubt.
That the court did not see the repugnance of delegating police powers to a private entity is amazing.
Post a Comment