May 21, 2009

Trusses are not limited common elements but rather common elements and therefore are the responsibility of the Homeowners Association to repair

MICHAEL LLOYD MEIER, ET AL. v. HUNTINGTON RIDGE TOWNHOUSE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC. (Tenn. Ct. App. October 23, 2008).

Homeowners association appeals the grant of summary judgment in favor of owners who sued for a declaration that the Association was responsible for the cost of repair of defective floor trusses. The trial court found that found that the defective floor trusses were considered "common elements" under the covenants of the Association. We affirm the decision of the trial court.

Opinion may be found at the TBA website:
http://www.tba2.org/tba_files/TCA/2008/meierm_102408.pdf

"We do not find language in the Declaration of Covenants sufficient to hold that floor trusses should fall within the definition of “limited common elements,” particularly as that definition
incorporates those elements included within the definition of “common elements.” Being a part of the foundation and bearing wall systems, the trusses do not “serv[e] exclusively a single Unit or one or more adjoining units, the benefit or use of which is reserved to the lawful occupants of the Unit or Units”; rather they serve the entire building containing the units. In addition, the
characterization of the trusses as “appurtenances” to each unit is contrary to their function as part of the foundation, which is clearly a “common element.” The specific structural defects at issueaffect the entire structure." Id.