The challenge in a controversy like this one is to simplify the discussion as much as possible so it can be understood by all, lay persons and lawyers alike. An unfortunate reality in our modern society is that most people are simply too busy to take the time to learn all that they need to know to make informed decisions, a problem which is much worse under circumstances where legal issues and concepts are involved.

I know some of the recipients of my August 6, 2019 letter personally and I reached out to one of them on Friday, August 23, 2019 to find-out what he understood about this ongoing litigation after reviewing my letter. It has been a long time since I last talked to him and after catching up on what was happening with our respective families, we got down to discussing the purpose of my call.

As anyone who received my letter knows, it was addressed to the property owners in the Subdivision and "or Current Resident", and the "or Current Resident" language led this resident to discard my letter as junk mail (he overlooked the return address on the envelope). During our conversation, it was obvious to me that there is very little in the way of information being provided to anyone of the neighborhood by the CRC HOA, and same is consistent with what I gleaned from the four conversations I have had with recipients of my letter who have contacted me thus far.

While the litigation between our clients and CRC HOA and Richards include issues that cannot be resolved by signing a quitclaim deed, the quitclaim deed is only necessary because the CRC HOA and other residents have argued that the Agreement Regarding Development binds the property when there is no way that it does. I sent an email communication to my friend in hopes of clearing up any confusion and have made a recent posting to this website that distills this matter down to its essence.