January 4, 2010 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: Shannon L. Van Dorn, Esq.
818-698-8455 ext. 2
shannon@labizlaw.com
www.labizlaw.com Van Dorn & Marshak Law Offices steps in as Trial Counsel in Lawsuit Against a Downtown Los Angeles Homeowners Association Shannon L. Van Dorn and Jerry B. Marshak were retained by defendant Janice M. Zhang in a lawsuit brought against her by her homeowners association, the Savoy Community Association (the “HOA”). The HOA filed suit October 2, 2007 against Ms. Zhang alleging that the hardwood floors that she installed in about half of the flooring in her 500-sq. ft. studio unit violate the HOA’s covenants, codes and restrictions, commonly known as CC&Rs. The condo complex is the sprawling newer community development located at Rose & Alameda in the Little Tokyo area of downtown Los Angeles known as “The Savoy.” The lawsuit has attracted the attention of many condominium owners because it concerns the efforts of an HOA to enforce communal restrictions against a homeowner for conditions that exist entirely within the four walls of her condo unit. Ms. Zhang counter-sued, alleging among other things, discrimination by the HOA because of her disability. Ms. Zhang is afflicted with Multiple Chemical Sensitivity Disorder which requires her to live in a carpet-free environment and constitutes a disability requiring a reasonable accommodation under the federal Fair Housing Act and its state-law analogs. The HOA is demanding the removal of Ms. Zhang’s hardwood flooring, claiming it does not meet the HOA’s strict acoustic requirements---which are currently set at a higher level than state law requires. They claim the floors are too noisy even though Ms. Zhang’s flooring allegedly exceeds state requirements. The parties have been litigating for over two years over approximately 250 square feet of bamboo flooring. According to Zhang’s attorney, Shannon L Van Dorn: “This is just another example of the tyranny dictated by unreasonable homeowner’s association boards. An ounce of common sense could have settled this case a long time ago and is certainly one that should have never made it to trial. ” Defendant Zhang is represented by Van Dorn & Marshak Law Offices located in Burbank, Califoirnia. The case is filed at the Stanley Mosk courthouse in downtown Los Angeles, department 28. Case number is BC393894. The case is set to begin trial on January 11, 2010. For more information on the matter please contact Shannon L. Van Dorn, Esq., 818-698-8455 ext. 2. September 23, 2009 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: Jerry B. Marshak, Esq.
818.698.8455
jerry@labizlaw.com
DOG FIGHT:
Los Angeles Attorney Sues Homeowners’ Association Over Dog Weight Restriction The battle between homeowners and Homeowners’ Association (HOA) rules governing pets is a longstanding fight, but here comes another round. On September 4, 2009, Los Angeles attorney Shannon L. Van Dorn filed a Cross-Complaint against Los Feliz Towers Home Owners Association seeking a court order that the HOA’s CC&R that restricts dog ownership in the complex to dogs weighing no more than 25 pounds violates the law. California Civil Code section 1360.5 statute specifically allows a condominium owner to keep one of “any” dog, cat, bird or fish. Van Dorn claims that the HOA’s weight restriction violates the statute as it precludes the homeowner from owning any dog, as allowed by the statute, and instead allows the HOA unreasonably to dictate the type of dog a homeowner may have. There is no case law on the books regarding section 1360.5 since it was implemented by the California Legislature in January 2001. The Los Feliz Towers Homeowners Association asserted a claim against Van Dorn, a tenant in the complex, to remove her dog, a 12-year old Golden Retriever, on the basis that the dog is too heavy. The Association has a rule that no homeowner may keep a dog that weighs more than 25 pounds. The HOA has not claimed that the dog is a nuisance or has caused any disturbance at the complex. Ms. Van Dorn moved into the complex, a 196-unit high rise located in the Los Feliz area of Los Angeles, on April 1, 2009, under a lease agreement with homeowner Temidayo Akinyemi, which provided specifically for a Golden Retriever to live with Ms. Van Dorn in the unit. According to court documents, Mr. Akinyemi claims to have thought he had the right to allow larger dogs to live in his unit as he himself lived in the Unit with a German Shepherd and there are several other large dogs currently living in the complex. Ms. Van Dorn is represented by Jerry B. Marshak, Esq., of Van Dorn & Marshak Law Offices, located in the Silver Lake area of Los Angeles. According to Mr. Marshak, “This Association has a long history of abuse of authority and violation of law. A few years ago the Association paid a huge settlement to disabled owner Mimi Greenberg after it refused to provide her a reasonable accommodation for a parking space that would be usable for her. The Association litigated against Greenberg for five years and on the eve of trial finally coughed up the parking space—and $214,000.00. Cleary this Association is carrying on its legacy of litigiousness and unreasonableness.” Homeowners typically have no recourse to fight HOA enforcement of CC&Rs as litigation expense typically precludes it. However, this case seems to have provided the “perfect storm” for litigation over the issue as Los Feliz Towers decided to sue the tenant in this situation, an attorney, rather than the owner of the unit, providing a backdrop for an interesting litigation issue that could affect thousands of California community homeowners. On September 21, 2009, Los Feliz Towers lost its bid for a preliminary injunction to remove Van Dorn’s dog pending the outcome of the case. Judge Helen I. Bendix ruled that the harm to the Association in Van Dorn’s keeping her Golden Retriever at this time is “non-existent.” The case is filed at the Stanley Mosk courthouse in downtown Los Angeles, department 18. Case number is BC419138. For more information on the matter please contact Jerry B. Marshak, Esq., 323-661-7300 ext. 1. FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: Jerry B. Marshak, Esq.
818.698.8455
jerry@labizlaw.com
www.labizlaw.com
California Association of School Counselors Files an Infringement Suit Against Competing Organization That Stole Its Name California Association of School Counselors, Inc., files an Infringement Suit against a separate company operating under its same exact name. California Association of School Counselors, Inc., a California corporation since October 2000, (Plaintiff CASC) filed suit June 24, 2009, against California Association of School Counselors, Inc., a California corporation since July 2005 (Defendant CASC). The lawsuit alleges Trade Name Infringement, Dilution, Unfair Competition, and Common Law Trademark Infringement. The newer corporation’s name is an exact match of Plaintiff CASC. Therefore, since July 2005, there have been two non-profit organizations in California operating under the same exact name—“California Association of School Counselors, Inc.”—and that are serving the same exact purpose, i.e., acting as a membership-based peer organization for K-12 school counselors. The complaint alleges that both organizations solicit membership from the same finite pool of school counselors, and such paid memberships are the sole source of funding for both corporations and having two competing organizations with the same name is causing actual confusion in the marketplace as to the origin of each entity. Plaintiff CASC further alleges that the confusion is having a detrimental impact on its reputation and standing in the industry—as third parties are erroneously associating Defendant CASC’s business practices with Plaintiff CASC’s. Plaintiff CASC is represented by attorney Jerry B. Marshak of Van Dorn & Marshak Law Offices located in the Silver Lake area of Los Angeles. The case is filed at the Stanley Mosk courthouse in downtown Los Angeles, department 78. Case number is BC416491. For more information on the matter please contact Jerry B. Marshak, Esq., 323-661-7300 ext. 1.