## Facts

- Ironwood Country Club was a planned unit development governed by recorded covenants, conditions, and restrictions (CC&Rs) that formed a nonprofit owners association and authorized its board to enforce the governing documents and delegate authority to committees.
- The CC&Rs required owners to submit and obtain written approval from an architectural control committee before erecting or installing any “structure or improvement whatsoever,” including landscaping changes.
- Bernard and Perlee Solomon bought a lot with notice of the CC&Rs.
- In July 1983, the Solomons planted eight date palm trees without submitting plans or obtaining architectural committee approval.
- The association sued for declaratory relief and a mandatory injunction compelling removal of the trees.
- The trial court granted summary judgment for the association, declared a CC&R violation, and issued a mandatory injunction requiring removal.
- The Solomons appealed, challenging the propriety of granting mandatory injunctive relief on summary judgment.

## Issues

1. When a homeowners association seeks a mandatory injunction to enforce CC&Rs, what equitable showing must it make regarding its enforcement conduct and exercise of discretion?
2. On summary judgment, did the association establish entitlement as a matter of law to a mandatory injunction requiring removal of the unapproved trees?

## Decision

- The Court of Appeal reversed the summary judgment and mandatory injunction and remanded for further proceedings.
- The court agreed the Solomons violated the CC&Rs by planting trees without prior written approval.
- The court held the association did not establish, on summary judgment, that it was entitled to the equitable remedy of a mandatory injunction.
- The record lacked evidence concerning the association’s and architectural committee’s enforcement actions and whether enforcement was reasonable, in good faith, and nonarbitrary.

## Legal Principles

- A homeowners association may enforce recorded CC&Rs, but injunctive relief is governed by equitable principles.
- Mandatory injunctions are disfavored compared to prohibitory injunctions and require a clear showing of entitlement.
- To obtain equitable enforcement, an association must present evidence that it exercised enforcement discretion reasonably, in good faith, and without arbitrary or selective application.
- On summary judgment, proof of a technical CC&R violation alone does not establish entitlement to a mandatory injunction; the moving party must show no triable issue of fact exists on equitable factors bearing on the remedy.

## Conclusion

Although the owners’ unapproved landscaping violated the CC&Rs, the association could not obtain a mandatory removal order on summary judgment without evidence of its good-faith, nonarbitrary enforcement practices and other equitable facts supporting that specific remedy.


Ironwood Owners Ass’n IX v. Solomon, 178 Cal. App. 3d 766, 224 Cal. Rptr. 18 (Ct. App. 1986)