NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE
APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION
This opinion shall not "constitute precedent or be binding upon any court."
Although it is posted on the internet, this opinion is binding only on the
parties in the case and its use in other cases is limited. R.1:36-3.
SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY
APPELLATE DIVISION
DOCKET NO. A-4753-15T1
WENTWORTH AT CRYSTAL SPRINGS
COUNCIL ASSOCIATION, INC.,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
LAKALE T. GAGE and LATASHIA
GAGE,
Defendants-Respondents.
____________________________________________
Submitted September 12, 2017 – Decided September 19, 2017
Before Judges Fisher and Fasciale.
On appeal from the Superior Court of New
Jersey, Law Division, Sussex County, Docket
No. DC-000095-16.
Ansell Grimm & Aaron PC, attorneys for
appellant (Breanne M. DeRaps and Richard B.
Linderman, on the brief).
Lakale T. Gage and Latashia Gage, respondents
pro se.
PER CURIAM
Plaintiff Wentworth At Crystal Springs Council Association,
Inc., commenced this Special Civil Part collection action against
defendants Gage, the owners of a condominium unit within the
plaintiff-association. The association's two-page complaint
alleged defendants owed $3610 in unpaid assessments and $3139.50
in counsel fees.
When the parties appeared for trial, defendants maintained
the stance they took from the outset: the assessments were due but
the counsel fees sought were unreasonable. By the time of trial,
even though the reasonableness of the counsel fee was the only
contested issue, the association had not provided defendants with
a statement or invoice quantifying those fees. Rather than hear
testimony, the trial judge directed the association to provide a
certification of services, and he allowed defendants an
opportunity to respond. For reasons expressed in a cogent written
opinion, the judge awarded the association $3610 in unpaid
assessments and only $1500 in counsel fees. The judge determined
that plaintiff engaged in numerous unnecessary services and sought
reimbursement for items that were "inflated" or "excessive." He
observed that the fees requested had almost doubled since the
action's commencement even though defendants had never disputed
their obligation to pay the assessments. The judge also viewed the
counsel fee sought as disproportionate to the assessments upon
which the suit was based. The judge concluded that the
association's counsel fee request was unreasonable and awarded
2 A-4753-15T1
$1500. The judge also denied the association's reconsideration
motion for reasons expressed in another written opinion, which
contained an additional analysis of the award sought.
In appealing, the association argues the judge relied on
incorrect legal principles, failed to apply the business judgment
rule, and arbitrarily reduced the counsel fee request. We find no
merit in these arguments and affirm both the initial judgment and
the order denying reconsideration for the reasons expressed by
Judge David J. Weaver in his thorough and well-reasoned written
opinions.
Affirmed.
3 A-4753-15T1