Commonwealth Court Judge P. Kevin Brobson.

William and Bette Ann Belleville, who believe their developer and homeowners association in Chester County overcharged them by $200 a year for five years starting in 2001, have been in court since 2008 trying to get back that $1,000. Except now the amount of money on the table has grown considerably.

The Commonwealth Court has upheld a lower court's grant of $100,000 in punitive damages to be paid to the Bellevilles by developer David Cutler Group Inc. That's in addition to the original compensatory damages award of $1,000.

The court also vacated the order for Cutler to pay the Bellevilles $212,895 in attorney fees. It's not that Cutler shouldn't pay the fees—it's just that some of the $450-per-hour bills should be removed from the tab, Commonwealth Court Judge P. Kevin Brobson said in a June 28 order.

Brobson, joined by Judges Anne Covey and Christine Fizzano Cannon, sent the case back to trial court for recalculation of the fees, deducting the cost of certain procedural arguments in which Cutler was successful.

“On remand, the trial court is directed to exclude from its award of attorneys' fees any and all attorneys' fees incurred by the Bellevilles in connection with Cutler's successful assertion of any procedural/non-merit based defenses during this litigation, which shall include, but not necessarily be limited to, those attorneys' fees incurred in connection with the Bellevilles' motion for class certification, Cutler's preliminary objections to the Bellevilles' complaint, Cutler's motion to dismiss for failure to join an indispensable party, and the prior appeals to this court,” Brobson said.

Cutler was represented by Richard McBride of the Law Office of Richard McBride in Lower Gwynedd. McBride on Thursday declined to comment on Brobson's ruling.

The Malvern Hunt Homeowners Association was represented by Steven L. Sugarman of Steven L. Sugarman & Associates in Berwyn. Sugarman could not be reached.

The Bellevilles were represented by Andrew Schneider of Silverman Trotman & Schneider in Philadelphia.

Schneider noted Thursday the long-running nature of the dispute—which is still not over.

“It was never about the money. It was about the illegal and secretive filing of community documents,” Schneider said. He called Brobson's ruling “fair and reasonable.”

“The trial court's decision was pretty close to the appellate conclusion,” Schneider said. “The homeowners association got stuck with the short end of the stick because the developer was very unethical, hence the punitive damages and attorney fees.”

Cutler developed the Malvern Hunt planned community with 279 properties divided into three communities: The Reserve, The Chase and The Ridings. The Reserve has 101 minimum-maintenance single-family lots. The Chase has 95 carriage homes. The Ridings has 83 standard single-family units. The Bellevilles bought a home in The Ridings in 2001.

Malvern Hunt Homeowners Association controls and maintains open spaces and amenities, including tennis courts and playgrounds. Membership in the association consists of the 196 lot owners of The Chase and The Reserve. The Bellevilles and the other 82 residents of The Ridings are excluded from membership in the association, and also from maintenance services such as lawn care and snow removal provided to the other two sections, Brobson said.

The Bellevilles contend that the original governing documents required them to pay no annual fee after their initial $1,000 payment upon purchase. But, they allege, without their knowledge, the developer changed the rules illegally and began requiring them to pay 20% of the neighboring homeowners' annual association fee.

Although Brobson is sending the case back to redo the math on the attorney fees, he agreed in  general with Chester County Court of Common Pleas Judge Edward Griffith.

Brobson said Section 2503(7) of the Judicial Code allows a trial court to award reasonable attorney fees as a sanction “for dilatory, obdurate or vexatious conduct during the pendency of the matter.” He defined “vexatious conduct” as that which is “without sufficient grounds and serving only to cause annoyance.” He defined “obdurate conduct” as “stubbornly persistent in wrongdoing.”

“Here, the trial court concluded that Cutler's conduct during the pendency of this litigation was obdurate and vexatious because Cutler essentially advanced a frivolous defense to the merits of the Bellevilles' claims,” Brobson said. “Based on our review of the trial court's decision, we find no abuse of discretion with respect to the trial court's conclusion that Cutler's advancement of a frivolous defense on the merits constituted obdurate and vexatious conduct.”

The case is Belleville v. Cutler.