Jane Miller Litigation
Jane Miller Access Litigation. In 2001, Mr. Rossi acquired two large undeveloped parcels of land “inside” the residential section of SLBE. These parcels were never annexed into the Master Association. In 2021, he sold one of these parcels to Jane Miller.
At all times during his ownership of these parcels, the Master Association recognized Mr. Rossi’s right to use the Loop Road and provided him access for such use. However, after Ms. Miller’s purchase, the Master Association locked her out asserting she had no right to access her property through their gates. Again, asserting this was a privilege, not a right, that it could withhold in its absolute discretion.
She brought suit in 2022. The trial court granted her request for a preliminary injunction requiring the Master Association to give her and her designees access to her property.
The Master Association appealed. In a scathing opinion, the Second Appellate District made several findings and conclusions that completely gutted the Master Association’s defenses both here and in Ms. Miller’s case.
First, the Appellate Court flatly rejected Master Association’s argument that the SLBE HOA CC&Rs give only annexed parcels the right to use the portion of the Loop Road in question. It held, instead, that held that the “plain meaning” of Section 4.12 “expressly provides for use of the private roads over the common areas for owners of non-annexed parcels.” The same is true in this case.
Second, it held that Civil Code Section 4505(b) evidences a “legislative policy in favor of easements for ingress and egress in planned developments” including, as here, for “non-annexed” parcels. The Court found Section 4.12 “affirm[s]” this policy. The same is true in this case.
Third, the Court held Ms. Miller was entitled to an implied easement based on references to the Loop Road on the various tract maps that led to the creation of her parcel. The same is true in this case. Among other things, Mr. Rossi obtained title to the Avila Village parcel in 1993 with a direct reference in his deed to Tract Map 1614 showing the portion of Lupine Canyon Road (known as Lot 55) that connects Blue Heron Drive (owned by Mr. Rossi) to the portion of Lupine Canyon Road also owned by Mr. Rossi, providing him an easement for access to and from the golf course.
Fourth, the Court noted that Ms. Miller “presents a very high likelihood that she will prevail in establishing an easement over the private road even if she has an alternate route to her parcel.” The same is true here.
After the trial court decision in the 2018 case and the appellate court decision in the Jane Miller case, it became obvious to any objective observer that there was simply no good faith basis for the Master Association to continue to dispute our rights of use and access.