Thompson Crossing v. Bandy

── Thompson Crossing v. Bandy ── Court: Colorado Court of Appeals Date: May 14, 2026 Category: General 25CA1130 Thompson Crossing v Bandy 05-14-2026 COLORADO COURT OF APPEALS Court of Appeals No. 25CA1130 Larimer County District Court No. 23CV30793 Honorable C. Michelle Brinegar, Judge Thompson Crossing II Association, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Ellen Lee Bandy, Defendant-Appellant. ORDER REVERSED AND CASE REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS Division I Opinion by JUDGE DUNN J. Jones and Fox, JJ., concur NOT PUBLISHED PURSUANT TO C.A.R. 35(e) Announced May 14, 2026 Johnson Muffly & Dauster, PC, Ezekiel Rauscher, Fort Collins, Colorado, for Plaintiff-Appellee The Law Office of William J. O’Donnell, P.C., William J. O’Donnell, Centennial, Colorado, for Defendant-Appellant ¶1 Defendant, Ellen Lee Bandy, appeals the district court’s order enforcing a settlement agreement that required her to pay attorney fees to plaintiff, Thompson Crossing II Association (the Association). Bandy doesn’t dispute that she owes fees under the settlement agreement but maintains that the court erred by awarding fees without holding a hearing on their reasonableness. Because we agree, we reverse the order awarding attorney fees and remand the case for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. I. Background ¶2 For alleged violations of the “Declaration of Covenants, Conditions, Restrictions and Easements” (the Declaration) for Thompson Crossing II — a common interest community — the Association filed a complaint against Bandy. The Association requested injunctive relief to prevent Bandy from, among other things, building an in-ground pool and using the common area for storage. ¶3 The Association and Bandy later entered into a settlement agreement. The settlement agreement stated, in relevant part, that Bandy would remove the encroachments she constructed and repair the damage she caused within sixty days. And it stated that 1  Bandy would “pay all attorney fees, court costs, and expenses related to the Association’s enforcement of the Declaration, including the surveyor fees (collectively, ‘Settlement Amount’).” The settlement agreement did not identify the Settlement Amount but stated that the Association would “deliver to [Bandy] its calculation of the Settlement Amount” within seven days of its approval of Bandy’s remediation work and that Bandy would then pay the Settlement Amount to the Association within seven days. If Bandy did not pay the Settlement Amount, the agreement authorized the Association to file a motion asking the court to enter judgment for that amount.1 ¶4 The parties extended the deadline for Bandy to complete the restoration work under the settlement agreement. The Association, however, eventually asked the court to set a hearing to enforce the settlement agreement. After an evidentiary hearing, the court found that Bandy had not fully complied with the settlement agreement and ordered her to perform additional remediation work. The court 1 The settlement agreement also included a separate provision stating, “In the event that either [p]arty seeks to enforce this [a]greement, the non-defaulting party shall be entitled to recovery [sic] attorney fees and costs from the defaulting party.” 2  also said, “[T]he payment regarding attorney[] fees and the surveying that was part of the settlement agreement, those need to be paid.” ¶5 After Bandy completed the required work, the Association filed a motion to enforce the settlement agreement, alleging that Bandy had failed to pay the Settlement Amount. Bandy objected to the motion, arguing that the requested fees were “disputed” and “unreasonable,” and requested a hearing on the reasonableness of the requested at