II v. Diana Drummond (2010)

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION

In this case the plaintiff, an association of condominium owners known as Ryefield II which is located in Vernon, Connecticut, brings an action against the defendant Diana Drummond, alleging in the first count that the Association voted to bar the defendant from keeping her German Shepard, Lobo, on Association property because of its aggressive nature, which was the subject of a complaint that it had bitten two people on the Association property.   Said complaint also alleges that after hearing and notice that Lobo should be removed from the property not later than October 22, 2007, an additional Association hearing extended the removal date to November 19, 2007.

When that deadline was not met Ryefield brought an injunction action which was heard by Sferrazza, J. Judge Sferrazza granted the injunction (on February 1, 2008) [44 Conn. L. Rptr. 819] which enjoined Ms. Drummond from keeping Lobo at Ryefield after April 1, 2008, with a $50 per day penalty thereafter for violation of the injunction.   It is further alleged that Lobo was not removed from the property until on or about November 24, 2008.

Ryefield levied fines against the defendant of $25.00 per day-totaling $8875, plus costs and legal fees as chargeable by the Association Declaration.   (Exhibit 2, Sec. 19.3(e).)   Ryefield seeks $20,161.80 in addition for Attorneys fees for a total of $29,036.80.

The second count alleges that when Ms. Drummond sold her unit she did not include the detached garage assigned to her unit, but later transferred it to a third party.   The Declaration provides that may be done, but requires an amendment to the Declaration and further requires that the Association be reimbursed for its reasonable attorneys fees for the cost of the Amendment as well as recording costs.   It is further alleged that counsel for both sides agreed on a cap of $900 for this legal work, which was paid for by Ryefield, who now seeks reimbursement.

At the trial of this case, the plaintiff (Ryefield) called two witnesses;  Eric Shaefer, the owner of Advanced Property Management, a condominium management company with about fifty condominium complexes under its management, including Ryefield.   Most of the documentary evidence was introduced through Mr. Shaefer, including the bylaws, the Declaration, minutes of condo board meetings, of the garage sale, and invoices for legal fees.   He did not have firsthand knowledge of the dog involved nor did he witness any alleged attacks.

The plaintiffs other witness, Elizabeth Otto, was an employee of Advanced Property Management (APM) from January 2001 to January 2008.   She was the contact person for unit owners, attended board meetings, and sent out directives as ordered by the board.   She was not on site every day, but would be there at least one day a week.   Unit owners would bring their complaints to her, including those with animal complaints.   She was not a firsthand witness to any incidents involving Lobo. The plaintiff produced no evidence from anyone who saw Lobo on Ryefield property after April 1, 2008 when Judge Sferrazza's injunction went into effect.

The self-represented defendant also called two witnesses, herself and her father Wayne Drummond.

The party making a claim has the burden of proof with respect to that claim.   The defendant does not have to present evidence to disprove the plaintiff's claim.  Mankert v. Elmat Co., Products, Inc., 84 Conn.App. 456, 463-64 (2004).

The Court is not persuaded that Lobo was on the property of Ryefield II between November 19, 2007 and November 24, 2008, when the defendant sold her condominium unit.   No one testified that he or she personally saw Lobo there.   The testimony from Ms. Otto that she received complaints to that effect were weak hearsay reports which, while admitted under the business records exception to hearsay, do not overcome the defendant's testimony that there were one or two neighbors with whom she did not get along and whose animus toward her made their claims about her unreliable.

More significant, however, was the credible testimony of the defendant's father, Wayne Drummond, who testified that the defendant moved into his home around November 19, 2007 and was housed with him until November 2008, when the defendant sold the condominium.   Although he spent less than a month in Florida during this time, his daughter had access to his Coventry home and to his knowledge, she stayed there in his absence.   There were instances when the defendant went back to Ryefield II, for instance to get the condo ready for showing, or to clean, but she did not “live there” as that term is normally used.

The defendant did admit that Lobo was with her on a few of these occasions.   Her testimony was to the effect of fifteen days during that one year period-at $25 per day, which would be $375.

The Court awards damages to the plaintiff as follows:

Condo fines imposed $ 375.00

Attorneys fees for papers effecting the

garage sale (by agreement of counsel) 900.00

Attorneys fees re:  Injunction and hearing (exhibit 26) 2,608.00

Attorneys fees re:  Collection matter 125.00

Total Damages:  $4,008.00

The plaintiff may submit a bill of costs.  (P.B. Section 18-5).

Klaczak, J.T.R.

Klaczak, Lawrence C., J.T.R.