The HOA Board is pleased to report that the State District Court ruled in favor of the HOA and judgments have been entered against Colorado Timber Ridge Ranch, LP, Joseph Machock and the Taulmans. Below is a summary of the court's rulings:
In April 2009, the Board met with and retained the law firm Shand, Newbold, and Chapman from Durango, CO concerning potential legal action against the Developer of Colorado's Timber Ridge subdivision. On May 20, 2009, a lawsuit was filed in the Archuleta County District Court against Colorado Timber Ridge Ranch Limited Partnership, Joe Machock (developer & general partner), and George & Jean Taulman (owner of the Equestrian Center land) seeking a Declaratory Judgment on the basis that:
#1 - the Developer failed to reserve the right to develop the remaining land in Timber Ridge in the CC&R's as required by the Colorado Common Ownership Interest Act (CCIOA) but subdivided the remaining land into 35+ acre parcels, calling it Timber Meadows, without the consent of the HOA.
#2 - the Developer did not have the legal right to convey the Equestrian Center property to the Taulman's by way of a Deed In Lieu of Foreclosure.
A litigation committee was formed by the Board consisting of Jim Denvir, Garry Lassman, Barbara Parada, and Jody McAlister to act as the liaison between the law firm and the Board.
The responses lack any specific facts in support of the asserted counterclaims. On that basis, our attorneys have prepared a Motion to Dismiss the Second and Third Counterclaims and this pleading is posted as well.Please note that Machock’s attorney has raised the defense that all of the property owners weren’t named as defendants.This defense is in direct opposition to Machock’s representations in his letter to the property owners that we shouldn’t be named as defendants.
On March 11, 2010, Archuleta County District Court Judge Gregory Lyman signed the order granting the dismissal of the counterclaims. Please understand that the Order Granting Plaintiff's Motion to Dismiss Counterclaims Without Prejudice just means that the Judge is allowing the Defendants time to offer some supporting facts since the Defendants did not do that when they initially filed their counterclaims.
Also on March 11, 2010, Jeffrey Lane, filed a Substitution of Counsel notifying the court that he has left the Law Firm of Springer and Steinberg PC (which represented Machock) to start the Law Offices of Jeffrey A. Lane PC which Machock has retained as legal counsel.
On March 29, 2010, a Notice to Set was filed by our attorneys so that the Court and the counsel for each of the parties can be present to discuss the issues surrounding the counterclaims made by the defendents and set a trial date in the matter.
On April 14, 2010, a Minute Order was filed setting trial for November 22, 2010.
On April 27, 2010, two days before an answer to the counterclaims were due, Colorado Timber Ridge Ranch, LP, filed Chapter 11 bankruptcy.
On April 29, 2010, counsel for the limited partnership filed a Statement Regarding Notice of Removal of the HOA's civil lawsuit from the Archuleta County District Court to the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Colorado.
On May 3, 2010, the Archuleta District Court vacated the 11/16/2010 pre-trial conference and 11/22/2010 trial and ordered the Case Stayed pending resolution of the bankruptcy case.
Also on May 3, 2010, a Motion to Withdraw was granted to Jeffrey A. Lane to withdraw as counsel for Joe Machock and the Taulmans.
On May 27, 2010, the HOA's bankruptcy attorney, Curt Todd, filed an Objection to Motion for Removal and a Motion to Abstain or Remand, requesting the bankruptcy court abstain from hearing the HOA's civil case and remanding it back to the Archuleta County District Court.
On June 17, 2010, counsel for the limited partnership filed a Response in Opposition to Motion to Abstain and Remand as well as a Motion to Amend Answer and File Counterclaims.
On July 15, 2010, the United States Bankruptcy Court Judge ruled in favor of the HOA and is abstaining from hearing our civil case and remanding it back to the Archuleta County District Court. Refer to Order.