The appeals court which governs over Brooklyn, Staten Island and Long Island, just issued a decision holding that the Meadowbrook Pointe Homeowners Association, Inc.’s rule that dogs greater than 25 pounds can’t be on the association premises, was unenforcible and should have been done by an amendment to the HOA’s Declaration. That would have required a vote of 66 2/3% of the owners and then a recording of the amended Declaration against each of the HOA units.
The Second Department explained that:
[T]he plaintiff demonstrated, prima facie, that the board’s adoption of the house rule was not authorized by the condominium bylaws, and thus, the adoption of that rule was not protected by the business judgment rule (see Yusin v Saddle Lakes Home Owners Assn., Inc., 73 AD3d 1168, 1171; Strathmore Ridge Homeowners Assn., Inc. v Mendicino, 63 AD3d 1038). Since neither the condominium bylaws nor the condominium declaration of covenants, restrictions, easements, charges, and liens (hereinafter the declaration) contained any restriction on the size of dogs permitted on the condominium premises, the house rule constituted an amendment of a permitted use of the plaintiff’s unit, which, pursuant to Article X of the condominium bylaws, required approval by 66 2⁄3% of the homeowners at a noticed meeting, and an amendment to the declaration (see Gabriel v Board of Mgrs. of the Gallery House Condominium, 130 AD3d 482; Board of Mgrs. of Vil. View Condominium v Forman, 78 AD3d 628, 630). Turan v Meadowbrook Pointe Homeowners Assn., Inc., 2022 NY Slip Op 07255
It is critical for boards to have experienced counsel analyze whether a rule change is sufficient or whether an amendment to the governing documents by an owners’ vote is necessary. Read the decision here.
