## Facts

- Robert and Eleonore Schwarzmann owned and occupied a unit in the Bridgehaven condominium in Seattle.
- The Bridgehaven Association was an unincorporated condominium association governed by a seven-member board, responsible for maintaining and repairing common areas, including the roof and attic spaces above units.
- In 1978–1979, the Schwarzmanns experienced water leakage into their unit from above; a roofing contractor attributed the problem to attic condensation in a common-area space.
- The Schwarzmanns repeatedly complained, including raising the issue at the January 8, 1979 annual meeting.
- The Schwarzmanns alleged the board failed for months to accept responsibility or respond adequately, causing unit damage, loss of value, disruption of daily life, and emotional/medical harm.
- The Schwarzmanns sued the association and individual directors for property damage, diminished value, and personal injury/emotional distress damages.

## Issues

1. Whether RCW 64.32.240 requires tort actions relating to condominium common areas and facilities to be maintained only against the association, thereby barring personal tort liability claims against individual directors.
2. Whether individual directors may nonetheless be personally liable based on alleged bad faith or improper conduct, including breach of fiduciary duty, intentional interference with property rights, negligent infliction of emotional distress, or veil-piercing.

## Decision

- The Court of Appeals affirmed partial summary judgment dismissing all claims against the individual directors, leaving claims against the association pending.
- RCW 64.32.240 was applied as a substantive limitation requiring tort actions relating to common areas to be brought only against the association.
- The record did not show that any director acted outside board authority, with corrupt motives, or in bad faith regarding the condensation problem.
- The court rejected veil-piercing because there was no evidence directors knowingly participated in, condoned, or acted in bad faith regarding wrongful or negligent conduct.
- Claims for intentional interference with property rights and negligent infliction of emotional distress failed for lack of evidence meeting the required elements as to any individual director.

## Legal Principles

- Statutory language is given its plain meaning absent a contrary legislative intent.
- Under RCW 64.32.240, tort actions relating to condominium common areas and facilities must be maintained only against the association of apartment owners, not individual directors.
- Condominium directors are not personally liable for board actions taken within board authority, in good faith, and without corrupt motives (a business-judgment-type protection).
- A court will not disregard the separate identity of an unincorporated condominium association absent proof directors acted in bad faith or knowingly participated in or condoned wrongful or negligent conduct.
- Intentional interference with property rights requires intentional or reckless, improperly motivated, unauthorized conduct.
- Negligent infliction of emotional distress requires foreseeability of harm and unreasonable conduct in light of the risk.

## Conclusion

The court held that tort claims arising from conditions in condominium common areas must be pursued against the association under RCW 64.32.240, and that individual directors are not personally liable absent evidence of bad faith, corrupt motive, or knowing participation in wrongful conduct.


Schwarzmann v. Ass'n of Apartment Owners of Bridgehaven, 33 Wn. App. 397, 655 P.2d 1177 (Wash. Ct. App. 1982)