Small Claims Appeal

What is the name of your state? Maine

Sued my HOA in sm claims for breach of contract per one of the restrictive covenants. The issue did not involve any title to real estate. Used governing docs (By-laws, CC&Rs, deed, Articles of Incorporation) as supporting evidence. Judge found in favor of defendant and stated "Small claims court has no authority to issue declaratory judgment re association docs." I found no rules in small claims procedures or Title 14 Ch. 707 limiting any court from making a declaratory judgment. Can I appeal this as a question of law? Should the judge have dismissed the case, as now I would be barred by res judicata if I don't appeal?What is the name of your state?

http://www.courts.state.me.us/mainecourts/smallclaims/smallclaimsguide/index.html

Here are the instructions for the guide:

How to Use this Guide:

* READ IT ALL!
* Read it all again.
* Highlight the sections that particularly pertain to your case.
* Check your preparation to be sure you have followed the instructions.


When you do that, post back with what you have found.

Small Claims Guide

I can't tell you how many times I read this guide. My claim was $250 plus service fees and was for breach of contract. My HOA is an incorporated road association whose sole purpose, as stated all over the governing docs, is to maintain all association roads. The By-laws go one step further and include addition road constructed within the "plan". In the restrictive covenants, it states "Grantee, for himself, his heirs, personal representatives, successors and assigns, covenants and agrees to pay, annually, equal shares per deeded building lot, of the cost to maintain all the roads and common areas shown on said plan of Warren Shores and to become a member of Warren Shores Lot Owners Association."

Restrictive covenants are well recognized as a binding contract. There is a duty to do something, it is in writing and it is enforceable by law. There is no issue in my claim regarding title to real estate, the only exclusion for a small claims action. Also, the judge waited until after I countered all of the association's defenses, after hearing all of my evidence, before implying he may not have jurisdiction over the matter. He also rediculed me for having the hearing recorded. It's a good thing I did!

Ok, now I’ve read the guide too and know more than I wanted or thought I’d ever need to know about Maine Small Claims. I went further and read Title 14, Ch. 707. I suspect that you may not have gone far enough. It’s just one opinion, but I think that Ch. 738 may be dispositive.

OP – I find it a little hard to understand the gravamen of your action from the facts posted, but I infer that you were requesting some form of declaratory relief. I’m not familiar with every state’s SC courts, but the ones with which I do have some familiarity are foreclosed from entertaining such matters – i.e. SC doesn’t grant declaratory relief. Your statute reads as follows:

§7481. Small Claims Act; jurisdiction
There is established a small claims proceeding for the purpose of providing a simple, speedy and informal court procedure for the resolution of small claims. It shall be an alternative, not an exclusive, proceeding. The District Court shall have jurisdiction of small claims actions. The District Court shall have the power to grant monetary and equitable relief in these actions. Equitable relief is limited to orders to return, reform, refund, repair or rescind. [1981, c. 667, §2 (NEW).]

The emphasis is mine, and declaratory relief is excluded by omission, but you appear to know where you’re going here and recognize the principle of res judicata on appeal. Based on the sketchy facts posted, my speculation is that, if your prayer was for declaratory relief, the one fact upon which an appeal might be based is that the judge appears to have been right in the first instance and the court lacked jurisdiction to hear the action. You’d have to convince an appeals court that, under the circumstances, the ruling was a nullity.

My initial claim did not seek declaratory relief, just a return. The judge is allowed to amend the claim as the evidence moves him, but a declaratory judgment was and is unnecessary. There is no ambiguity in the evidence I provided. I have researched ME Superior Ct opinions, and found plenty of support in their discussions of other HOA cases, esp. DeWolf v. Usher Cove, where they recognized restrictive covenants as a binding contract. There was more to the judge's rendering than what I have posted, but it just contradicts his first statement.

Do you think he should have dismissed the case? Is that grounds for appeal?