On January 25, 2013, the Nevada Supreme Court issued “Orders Granting Petition” in two cases involving the ability of a homeowners association to pursue project wide construction defect actions in a representative capacity: D.R. Horton v. The Eighth Judicial District Court [High Noon at Arlington Ranch HOA] and Environment for Living, Inc. and Time for Living, Inc. v. The Eighth Judicial District Court [Serenity HOA]. KNCH worked on the drafting of the Petitions for Writ of Mandamus in both cases and Robert C. Carlson, Esq. presented oral argument for the Defense in the High Noon at Arlington Ranch HOA case.
In High Noon at Arlington Ranch, the Nevada Supreme Court ruled that the District Court abused its discretion by not performing “a full and thorough NRCP 23 analysis of the claims involving the building envelope.” Citing to First Light II, the Court found, “[b]ecause the building envelopes are individually owned, any claims that High Noon wishes to bring related to the building envelopes are in a representative capacity and must survive an NRCP 23 analysis.”
In Serenity, the Nevada Supreme Court ruled that the District Court failed to conduct a sufficient NRCP 23 analysis of the homeowners association’s claims concerning the “building envelope.” The Court focused on the “predominance” element of NRCP 23 in conjunction with the specific facts of the case and the Court’s Decision in Shuette v. Beazer Homes Holdings Corp., 121 Nev. 837 (2005). In determining the “predominance” element was not met, the Court noted, “[n]ot all of the residences have been inspected, and the variances in the defects in the inspected residences do not support extrapolating the findings to the residences that have not been inspection.”
These two Orders appear to be great results for developers and subcontractors alike in regards to the defense of representative-type, construction defect lawsuits brought by homeowners associations.