update on case

The case resumed april 7th after a month long delay. After I put on my witnesses and the defense put on a couple of witnesses the Court paused the proceedings and stated that it is inclined to find that I did resign at the November 19 meeting. However, instead of issuing a ruling, the Court encouraged both parties to resolve the matter.

The Court suggested that:

I dismiss my claims,
The defense dismiss their counterclaims (including claims for attorneys’ fees), and
I run again for a position on the Board in the upcoming April 15 election.

I agreed to this proposal in principle.

I then raised an important issue with the Court. I explained that if the Court is inclined to find that a valid resignation occurred, then the conditions associated with that resignation must also be honored. Specifically, I stated that I am entitled to reimbursement for money I personally spent on behalf of the Association while serving as property manager in 2024 and the first half of 2025, once those expenses are verified.

The Court initially indicated that reimbursement was not an issue before it. I responded that if the resignation is being treated as valid, then the full context and conditions of that resignation—including reimbursement—must be considered as part of that determination.

The defense expressed that they did not want to resolve the case at that point and preferred to continue presenting witnesses. The Court declined that approach and stated that it had heard enough and wanted both sides to work toward resolving the case.

The Court then gave specific instructions:

I was to submit all of my receipts by Thursday at 5:00 PM (approximately 48 hours), and
The defense was to have the Board review and verify those receipts by Monday at 5:00 PM.

Due to the fact that I no longer have access to the Association’s records or files from when I served as property manager, I had to reconstruct my expenses manually by reviewing approximately two years of bank records and locating supporting receipts.

I timely submitted documentation totaling $5,516.24, representing out-of-pocket expenses I paid on behalf of the Association during a time when we did not have access to an Association credit card.

On Sunday, a Board member contacted me requesting clarification and additional details regarding certain receipts. While gathering that information, I identified an additional $713.50 in expenses that I had also personally paid on behalf of the Association but had not initially located. These expenses are supported by receipts and invoices.

The defense has now taken the position that they will not consider any receipts submitted after the Thursday 5:00 PM deadline. I declined to accept their reduced offer. I replied that the court did not order a hard deadline for submissions and preclude any receipts I discovered a two days afterwards and promptly turned over to the defense and board.
At this time:
The board doesn't want to drop the counterclaims for attorneys fees. (the judge already told the lawyers that he isn't inclined to award any attorneys fees)
The Court lifted the Temporary Injunction that had reinstated me to the Board since January 16. So as of April 8, i was off the board. The election is tomorrow.
The Court instructed the Board and management to include me on the ballot for the April 15 election.

All in all, this lawsuit required an enormous amount of work—far more than I anticipated. I invested a significant amount of time learning the rules of civil procedure.
While I have a strong understanding of the legal issues, I relied on AI tools to help guide the process. These tools were especially helpful in breaking things down into step-by-step methodology and organizing my approach. I would input the facts of my case, and the AI would generate clear, structured summaries that captured the key points effectively.
At the end of the day,

One of the biggest challenges for pro se litigants is procedural error—many cases are lost not on the merits, but because of technical missteps. I made a deliberate effort to avoid that, and as a result, my case did not fall into that trap.

The good news is, the lawsuit itself, and associated costs, was under $750. However, as they say time is money, I spent upwards of 80-100 hours working on my filings and responses. I enjoyed the learning process and i was able to channel my frustration into the case rather than let it eat me up .

Thank you for posting the detailed update, including your personal reflections on the effort.

ellen thanks for your comment. The judge already said they have to reimburse me.

The election was tonight.. after 3 hours of counting.. the vote was too close to call, the counter wants to redo the votes. 5 positions were up.
the top 3 positions are pretty solid,, the next 2 positions,, 4 candidates are less that 1 % apart. so they are going to do a recount.

Ellen,
At the hearing, the judge addressed the Board members present in court directly and was unequivocal: if the receipts are valid, they are to be reimbursed. The Board members agreed on the record.
My total out-of-pocket expenses over the past 18 months are $6,228.14. The Board has already reviewed and verified these receipts.
The only point of dispute is a ~$500 receipt that I submitted after my initial submission on Thursday. I discovered this receipt only after a Board member contacted me directly because his numbers did not match those previously calculated between me and defense counsel. While locating the specific receipts he believed were missing (which were in fact already provided but overlooked), I identified an additional receipt and submitted it promptly for clarity and completeness.

all the receipts have already been verified and validated

All attorneys are required to be hard-a---s with the opposition, especially pro se opposition. It is required as part of 'zealous advocacy' for one's client.

The insurer may have required a different (read: cheaper) attorney be used. I saw this once.

Re attorney's fees: Suit and countersuits nearly always ask for the opposing party to pay the attorney fees. But the latter is a catch-all. Either the covenants or statute have to clearly say that attorney's fees go to the prevailing party, or there will be no award.

If the HOA tried to implement Texas statute sections 82.161, then that's a hard sell IMO in this case. But if I were an attorney representing the HOA, I would certainly spend five minutes drafting this part of a countersuit, just to try to scare the other party.

As often it seems that judges split the baby, such that there is no prevailing party and each party pays their own attorney fees.

FWIW, I fed this situation to an AI[1] and (in short) it concluded that if there were less that 5,033 ballots cast, then yes, a recount is absolutely justified.

[1] An HOA Board held an election to fill 5 Board openings. There were 7 candidates running. Voters voted by selecting 5 of the 7 candidates on their ballot. The first 3 open seats were filled by candidates who each received a decisive number of votes. The remaining 2 open seats will be filled by 2 of the remaining 4 candidates, who received the following percentage of the vote:

candidate 4: 27.28%
candidate 5: 27.042%
candidate 6: 27.022%
candidate 7: 26.565%

Working from this data, can you determine the number of ballots that were cast?

129 votes cast. 5 seats open. ballot can vote for up to 5. i voted all my ballots with only 4 candidates. looks like others did this too

Oh. Yeesh! I didn’t know that. That’s going to make the counting even more complicated. Still: I’m happy there will be a recount, because tallying 129 ballots where each ballot has a weight based on sqft? Yeah, that could be “error-prone”.

I don’t think it was a waste of money. You now have to both pay to defend and attack.

no. I don't have to pay anything because the judge did not decide anything. he told us to settle the suit.. all he did was dissolve the temporary injunction he imposed back on January 16th. Where he put me back on the board

update..
the election results took two weeks to recount.
I did not get elected. the recount did materially change who was on the board.
weird thing.. our side collected 63 proxies and their size collected 60 proxies. basically with percentages totaled.. it was dead even.. the vote was decided by less than 1% point. The vote recount person, said it was a mess. there were ballots for people not present and without a proxy. there were proxies without signatures, proxies turned in without any ballot.. My friend did get on. and she will be a great board member . The self appointed president(for the past 3 months) was not elected which is awesome . He will never show up to another meeting. He doesn't even live here. good riddance.
I filed a motion to dismiss the counterclaim against me. The counterclaim did not make any new claims and was simply used as a vehicle to collect attorneys fees. I also filed a noticed of submission ,asking the judge to decide the motion without a hearing. We will see how it goes.