022114 RIEO, 14-01

Case DateFebruary 21, 2014
CourtRhode Island
14-01
Ethics Advisory Panel Op. 2014-01
Rhode Island Ethics Opinions
Rhode Island Supreme Court
February 21, 2014
         FACTS          The inquiry concerns the disbursement of escrowed funds which were earmarked for the replacement of a deck in a condominium building. The deck in question was attached to the condominium unit owned by the inquiring attorney's clients (Clients). The inquiring attorney is holding the escrowed funds. The facts relating to the escrowed funds span some twelve years, and are as follows.          The Clients' condominium unit had a wooden deck adjacent to their unit. The deck sat on a tar-and-gravel roof. The deck was removed incident to the replacement of the entire roof on the condominium building. Clients obtained an estimate from a contractor to rebuild the deck. Six of seven unit owners voted to replace Clients' deck, and agreed to a special assessment for its construction in amounts equal to their respective percentage ownership in the common areas. It was agreed that the owners would mail checks for their assessments to the inquiring attorney who, upon receiving the funds, established Clients Deck Account in a local bank. The total amount of the escrow is about $17,500.          Meanwhile, conflicts arose. Clients sued the condominium association alleging that the association had not properly authorized the work by the roofing contractor. A superior court justice ruled in favor of the association. The condominium association then sought the historic commission's approval of the design for the replacement of two decks, one being adjacent to Clients' unit. Clients objected because the design deviated from the design of the original deck. The historic commission approved the association's proposed design. Five of seven condominium owners thereafter voted to rescind the special assessment for the replacement of Client's deck. Clients appealed from the commission's decision but the decision was affirmed. Their remedies exhausted, Clients filed an application of certificate of appropriateness with the historic commission for replacement of the deck. The condominium association refused to submit a letter supporting Clients' application and the application was rejected. Clients wanted the construction done by a construction company of their choosing; the condominium association wanted the job to be put out to bid.          The condominium association demands that the Deck Fund be transferred to it, after which time...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT