I have filed a Complaint in AZ Superior Court against our HOA asserting that our BOD violated sections of the AZ Condominium Act. Principally a direct violation of Section 33-1248 re open meetings, and peripherally the appearances of a violation of Section 33-1243 regarding a conflict of interest
Basically in their "outraged" Answer and in subsequent "sweep it all under the rug" settlement offers, the Defendant(s), via their Attorney, are trying to claim that regardless there was no "harm done."
Well yes, the harm is a bit in the eye of the beholder. But I consider it significant at least from a behavioral standpoint. And besides the Board has acted to deprive the Membership of their right to comment on a very important matter before voting -- a matter I believe the Membership would have advised against. So (IMHO) I do see this as an indirect hit on my property value (i.e., an arrogant and dysfunctional Board is bad for property values) -- again, hard to prove.
Put it this way, our Board has run several red lights. And yet because the drivers coming the other way deftly avoided them "no harm was done." Well, what about the next time?
Even my attorney is advising me that Judges tend to look askance when no actual material harm is proven. And part of the problem is that the AZ the Condo act statutes regarding open meetings carry no penalty clauses. Whereas those in the more important public corporation sector do. Why should that matter?
I am simply looking for the Court to rule on a matter of law regardless. So how can I better press that aspect?