A Z N H v. Sunland Springs

── A Z N H v. Sunland Springs ── Court: Court of Appeals of Arizona Date: April 28, 2026 Category: General IN THE ARIZONA COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION ONE A Z N H REVOCABLE TRUST, Plaintiff/Appellant/Cross-Appellee, v. SUNLAND SPRINGS VILLAGE HOWEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, Defendant/Appellee/Cross-Appellant. No. 1 CA-CV 25-0424 FILED 04-28-2026 Appeal from the Superior Court in Maricopa County No. CV2023-096192 The Honorable Rodrick J. Coffey, Judge AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART; AND REMANDED COUNSEL John Sullivan, Chandler Counsel for Plaintiff/Appellant/Cross-Appellee Freeman Mathis & Gary, LLP, Scottsdale By Lisa M. Lampkin, Megan E. Ritenour Co-Counsel for Defendant/Appellee/Cross-Appellant Maxwell & Morgan, P.C., Mesa By Chad M. Gallacher Co-Counsel for Defendant/Appellee/Cross-Appellant  A Z N H v. SUNLAND SPRINGS Opinion of the Court OPINION Judge James B. Morse Jr. delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Presiding Judge Andrew M. Jacobs and Judge Brian Y. Furuya joined. M O R S E, Judge: ¶1 A Z N H Revocable Trust ("Homeowner") appeals the superior court's partial denial of summary judgment in its declaratory judgment action seeking to establish that Sunland Springs Village Homeowners Association ("Sunland Springs") failed to provide notices and agendas, and conduct its meetings in compliance with A.R.S. § ("Section") 33-1804. Sunland Springs cross-appeals the superior court's partial grant of summary judgment to Homeowner. Because Section 33-1804 requires associations1 to vote and take action at open meetings, we affirm the superior court on that issue. But Section 33-1804 requires associations to provide agendas containing information reasonably necessary to apprise association members about the topics to be addressed, so we reverse the superior court's denial of summary judgment on that issue. Further factual development is necessary to determine whether Sunland Springs complied with Section 33-1804 when identifying the reasons for its closed meetings, so we remand on that issue. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND ¶2 Sunland Springs is an association subject to the provisions of A.R.S. Title 33, Chapter 16. A.R.S. §§ 33-1801–20. Homeowner owns residential real property in the planned community managed by Sunland Springs. ¶3 Sunland Springs conducts business through board of directors' meetings, which are sometimes closed. Sunland Springs does not permit residents to attend closed meetings except by invitation. The president of Sunland Springs determines what business is addressed in closed meetings. Before closed meetings, Sunland Springs provides notice to members that includes the date, time, and place of closed meetings, and quotes the language of Section 33-1804(A) allowing for closed meetings. 1 Throughout this opinion, we use the word "association" as defined in Section 33-1802(1). 2  A Z N H v. SUNLAND SPRINGS Opinion of the Court Sunland Springs provides agendas for its closed meetings which identify matters only by the paragraph of Section 33-1804(A) that corresponds to the topic of the matter. Sunland Springs conducts formal business and voting during its closed meetings. During closed meetings, the board has, among other things, approved a $917,000 budget item, granted the community manager up to $7,000 in discretionary spending authority, addressed 13 waivers of the minimum age requirement for residents, and authorized foreclosures against two homeowners. ¶4 In December 2023, Homeowner filed a declaratory judgment action against Sunland Springs, alleging Sunland Springs failed to conduct its meetings in compliance with Sect