Cimarron Foothills Community Ass'n v. Kippen
Court of Appeals of Arizona
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
HOWARD, J.
¶ 1 After a bench trial, the trial court found that appellee Cimarron Foothills Homeowners Association was entitled to enforce its deed restrictions against appellants James and Betty Kippen, despite the Kip-pens’ claim that the restrictions violated the federal Fair Housing Amendments Act (“FHAA”). The Kippens argue the trial court erred in finding that their proposed accommodation was not reasonable and necessary under the FHAA and would extend a preference to them. Because the trial court did not clearly err in finding that the Kip-pens failed to demonstrate the necessity…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- US Airways, Inc. v. BarnettSupreme Court of the United States · 2002
- Vinson v. ThomasCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2002
- City of Edmonds v. Oxford House, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1995
- Alisha Bronk and Monica Jay v. Bernhard IneichenCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1995
- Lapid-Laurel, L.L.C. v. Zoning Board Of Adjustment Of The Township Of Scotch PlainsCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2002
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- Kuehn v. StanleyCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2004
- FLYING DIAMOND AIRPACK, LLC v. MeienbergCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2007
- Nolan v. Starlight Pines Homeowners Ass'nCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2007
- PUEBLO SANTA FE TOWNHOMES OWNERS'ASS'N v. Transcontinental Insurance Co.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 2008
- In re MH 2008-000438Court of Appeals of Arizona · 2009
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.