The Illinois Appellate Court recently ruled in favor of the Haverford Homeowners Association, dismissing claims made by condominium owners Scott Bogot and Nancy Dougan. The court found that the homeowners association's assessments were lawful and did not violate any fiduciary duties. This decision affects the condominium owners and sets a precedent regarding the authority of homeowners associations in managing community assessments.
The case, Bogot v. Haverford Homeowners Association (docket number 1-25-0080), stems from a dispute over how assessments were allocated among homeowners and condo owners in a planned development in Glenview, Illinois. The ruling, issued on May 22, 2026, clarifies the legal standing of homeowners associations and their ability to levy assessments.
Background
Scott Bogot and Nancy Dougan, along with a class of similarly situated condominium owners, filed a lawsuit against the Haverford Homeowners Association and its board members, including Hank Nothnagel, Christopher Shaw, Glenn Davis, and George Jameson. The plaintiffs argued that the assessments imposed by the homeowners association were unlawful and unconscionable, asserting that the board had breached its fiduciary duty by misappropriating funds.
The Haverford development comprises 50 detached homes and a condominium building with 48 units. The homeowners association manages the community and collects assessments for various expenses, including maintenance and landscaping of shared areas. The plaintiffs contended that the assessments disproportionately burdened condo owners, who collectively paid 49% of the community area assessments, despite the fact that 87% of that area functionally served the detached homes.
The case reached the appellate court after the circuit court dismissed the plaintiffs' claims. The circuit court had ruled that the covenant for assessments was valid and that the plaintiffs lacked standing to bring a claim for breach of fiduciary duty.
The Ruling
The Appellate Court of Illinois affirmed the circuit court's decision, ruling that the assessments imposed by the Haverford Homeowners Association were lawful. The court found that the covenant for assessments did run with the land, stating, "the covenant to pay assessments for maintenance of the community area touches and concerns the land." This means that the assessments are legally enforceable against all property owners in the community.
In addressing the plaintiffs' claim of unconscionability, the court noted that the assessment structure was not inherently unfair. The court stated, "By its terms, equal payment from each unit is not unconscionable," emphasizing that all residents had equal rights to use and enjoy the community areas.
Furthermore, the court ruled that the plaintiffs did not have standing to claim breach of fiduciary duty, as their allegations concerned misappropriation of association funds, which must be brought as a derivative action rather than an individual claim. The court concluded that the plaintiffs did not suffer a separate and distinct injury that would grant them standing to sue individually.
Impact
This ruling has significant implications for homeowners associations and condominium owners in Illinois. It reinforces the authority of homeowners associations to levy assessments and manage community funds without facing legal challenges from individual owners. The court's decision clarifies that the allocation of assessments, even if perceived as unfair, can be legally justified as long as all homeowners have equal access to community resources.
The ruling may also discourage similar lawsuits from condominium owners who feel that they are being unfairly assessed. It establishes a precedent that homeowners associations can operate under the existing legal framework without being compelled to change their assessment structures unless there is clear evidence of wrongdoing.
What's Next
While the plaintiffs have the option to appeal this decision to the Illinois Supreme Court, it remains to be seen if they will pursue that route. No related cases are currently pending that would directly affect this ruling, but the implications of this decision may influence future disputes between homeowners associations and property owners.