Case Summary

4893 In a claim that by stopping clients coming to see him at his home, a Homeowners' Association violated the Fair Employment and Housing Act, the Unruh Civil Rights Act, and Civil Code section 53, plaintiff's failure to cite in his appellate briefs legal authority for his position led the court to reject his arguments; for the same reason, the court rejected arguments that the Association waived compliance with its rules by failing to enforce them and that it had an obligation to reasonably accommodate plaintiff's needs; although plaintiff denied engaging in a home business, the court found his request to the Association that he be permitted to continue working from home, his admission that he was seeing at home eight people a day for counseling as he had when he worked from an outside office, and his statement that unless an injunction was issued to stop the Association from preventing his clients from entering he would lose $5,000 a day, all establish that he was running a home business, in violation of the Homeowners' Association rules and a local ordinance requiring approval by the city.

NELSON v AVONDALE HOA (Home Business) 172 CA4 857 [See: GovC 12900 etseq; CivC 51, 53; Badie v B of A 67 CA4 779, T/AT 12/98 ]