Opinion
DOCKET NO. A-4194-14T3
06-22-2016
WEDGEWOOD KNOLLS CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. AMGAD HESSEIN, Defendant-Respondent.
Thomas C. Martin argued the cause for appellant (Price, Meese, Shulman & D'Arminio, P.C., attorneys; Mr. Martin, of counsel and on the briefs). Amgad Hessein, respondent, argued the cause pro se.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION Before Judges Rothstadt and Currier. On appeal from Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Special Civil Part, Passaic County, Docket No. DC-0234-13. Thomas C. Martin argued the cause for appellant (Price, Meese, Shulman & D'Arminio, P.C., attorneys; Mr. Martin, of counsel and on the briefs). Amgad Hessein, respondent, argued the cause pro se. PER CURIAM
Plaintiff Wedgewood Knolls Condominium Association, Inc., appeals from a final judgment entered by the Law Division, after a bench trial, awarding plaintiff $1,630, but denying its request for counsel fees. Plaintiff's complaint against defendant Amgad Hessein, one of its unit owners, alleged there were outstanding maintenance fees and other related charges owed by defendant to plaintiff that totaled $3,015.32. The court initially entered a default judgment against defendant in the amount of $3,816.23, but later vacated the award and scheduled the matter for trial. At the conclusion of the trial, the court entered the final judgment, finding that plaintiff's claims for more than the amount awarded were unsupported by the evidence and that its claim for legal fees was not justified because plaintiff did not prevail.
On appeal, plaintiff argues the court failed to find that certain emails sent by defendant to plaintiff contained admissions as to the amount plaintiff claimed it was owed, and improperly barred plaintiff's use of a compilation of the fees owed by defendant as permitted by N.J.R.E. 1006. Plaintiff also contends that the court failed to permit it to submit a fee application to which it was entitled despite the fact that plaintiff did not recover the entire amount it claimed was due from defendant.
We find plaintiff's arguments regarding the sufficiency of its proofs and the judge's evidentiary ruling to be without sufficient merit to warrant discussion in a written opinion, R. 2:11-3(e)(1)(E), especially given the discretion afforded to judges' decisions in cases tried without a jury, see Rova Farms Resort, Inc. v. Inv'rs Ins. Co. of Am., 65 N.J. 474, 483-84 (1974); Cesare v. Cesare, 154 N.J. 394, 411-13 (1998), and to their rulings on the admissibility of evidence. DeVito v. Sheeran, 165 N.J. 167, 198 (2000). We affirm the entry of the final judgment for the reasons placed on the record by the trial judge as to plaintiff's claim for maintenance fees and related condominium charges.
However, we are constrained to reverse and remand the trial judge's denial of plaintiff's application for counsel fees, as the judge's reliance on the limited amount of plaintiff's recovery alone did not satisfy the court's obligation to consider all the relevant factors, see R. 4:42-9(b) (incorporating "the factors enumerated by [R.P.C.] 1.5(a)"), after an application is properly submitted. We remand to the trial court for a determination of whether reasonable attorney's fees as provided for by the Condominium Act, N.J.S.A. 46:8B-21, and under plaintiff's master deed are warranted, see Kellam Assocs., Inc. v. Angel Projects, LLC, 357 N.J. Super. 132, 139 (App. Div. 2003), after the court considers a properly submitted affidavit of services, R. 4:42-9(b), and any opposition from defendant. See Glen, Section I Condo. Ass'n v. June, 344 N.J. Super. 371, 373, 382 (App. Div. 2001) (addressing a fee application made pursuant to the Condominium Act).
Affirmed in part and reversed and remanded in part. We do not retain jurisdiction. I hereby certify that the foregoing is a true copy of the original on file in my office.
CLERK OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION