Finley

Finley v. Gantz CA4/1

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 6, 2026D084145California4,277 words

Opinion

Opinion

Kelety, J.

I. BACKGROUND

This case is discussed at length in our prior opinion in Finley, et al. v. Gantz (May 30, 2025, D082623) [nonpub. opn.] (Finley). As set forth in that opinion, Finley and Adams initiated a lawsuit the focus of which was the construction, presence, and use on Gantz’s property of a deck and gazebo that affected views from and to Finley and Adams’s property. In the lawsuit, Finley and Adams asserted two claims: one for breach of contract and the other for nuisance. The breach of contract claim was premised on a set of covenants, conditions and restrictions (CC&Rs) that had come into existence when the neighborhood was first developed as well as on a proposed amended set of CC&Rs that was put to a neighborhood vote during the period of construction. Referring to these instruments collectively as the CC&Rs, the operative complaint (complaint) alleged the “CC&Rs are valid and enforceable contracts between” the parties. In addition, it specified

several restrictions common to both sets of CC&Rs2 that Gantz’s construction and use of the deck and gazebo allegedly had breached. The complaint’s nuisance claim likewise was premised on both sets of CC&Rs, and it included an…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.