Home Epsten APC

Epsten, APC Welcomes Attorney Marta D. Morataya to Its Legal Team

San Diego, CA (December 15, 2025) – Epsten, APC is pleased to announce the addition of Attorney Marta D. Morataya to the firm’s San Diego office. Marta is a member of the firm’s Transactional Department.

“We welcome Marta to our firm. Her experience and focus on client needs make her a valuable addition as we continue to serve community associations. Welcome to the team, Marta!” said Kieran Purcell, Esq., CCAL, Managing Shareholder.

As a former social worker and legal intern for a number of diverse organizations such as the Smithsonian Institution and the University of New Hampshire’s Innovation team, Marta has extensive experience making connections and working with people from all walks of life. She utilizes those skills to communicate with clients and ensure that client needs are met efficiently with attention, respect, and reliability.

From these experiences Marta learned that research and creativity are important components when negotiating and drafting agreements or other legal documents. Marta looks forward to using her research and creative problem-solving skills to assist her clients at Epsten, APC.

About Epsten, APC:

Epsten, APC is proud to be one of the most experienced and qualified law firms providing legal expertise to community associations. With offices in San Diego, Palm Desert, and Temecula we serve associations throughout Southern California.

We provide association corporate counsel, CC&Rs interpretation and enforcement, rule enforcement, contract negotiation, insurance reviews, resolution of architectural disputes, as well as litigation of CC&R disputes and enforcement, breach of fiduciary duties, contract litigation, personal injury and property damage claims, construction defect, construction law, and fair housing.

Our community association attorneys play several roles in the success of our clients, serving as advisors, problem solvers, advocates, and educators. Our legal team is dedicated to the practice and study of the laws and regulations related to community associations in California. Several of our attorneys have been inducted into the prestigious College of Community Association Lawyers (CCAL®).

 

Contact:

Carolyn D. Decker
Chief Operating Officer
[email protected]
858.527.0111

Marta D. Morataya, Esq.

Architectural Review Committee Checklist

Architectural Review Committee Checklist

 Look to the governing documents:

  • Do they call for an architectural review committee (ARC)? What authority and/or restrictions to its authority apply?
  • Would the improvement, if approved, violate the governing documents? Does the ARC have the authority to approve the variance?

Follow all procedural steps:

  • Has the architectural application been submitted in its entirety?
  •  
    • Is there an official architectural application form that owners must submit? What information must be included?
    •  
    • Practice Tip: Mark all pages of an application (e.g., “1 of 6”) to ensure complete application is reviewed and saved together.
    •  
    • The complete copy of the application should be kept in the Association’s records.
  • What deadlines for approving/denying architectural applications exist in the governing documents and in the Civil Code?
  •  
      • If the deadline passes, is the application deemed automatically approved? Look to CC&Rs and Civil Code.
      •  
        • For example, under Civil Code §4745(e), applications for the installation of electric vehicle charging stations must be deemed approved unless denied in writing within sixty (60) days of submission.
        •  
        • Practice Tip: Calendar all automatic approval dates.
      • Procedure for making decision must be fair, reasonable, and expeditious. (Civil Code §4765 (a)(1))
      •  
      • Decision must be in writing (Civil code §4765 (a)(4))
      •  
        • Denial must explain why application was denied and provide owner with notice of right to appeal

Standards for Review:

  • Follow Guidelines.
  •  
      • Are they well written? Are they consistent with CC&Rs? If not, revise.
      •  
      • Criteria in guidelines may be subjective.
      •  
      • Decision making should not be arbitrary.
        •  
        • If certain improvements have been allowed in the past, applications for similar improvements should only be rejected if there is a tangible reason (i.e., different or changed circumstances).
Click here to download checklist in PDF

Get legal updates straight to your inbox.

Our newsletters highlight community association best practices, new developments in the laws affecting associations, and sheds light on topics of concern and relevance to those involved in association management.

Sign up

Updates on The Corporate Transparency Act as of 3/5/2025

Kieran J. Purcell, Esq., CCAL

Managing Shareholder

858.527.0111
Email
Practices: Community Association Counsel 

Share this article:

ENFORCEMENT OF THE CORPORATE TRANSPARENCY ACT SUSPENDED

 

In a significant development for U.S. common interest developments, the U.S. Treasury Department (Treasury Department) issued a press release on March 2, 2025, clarifying its enforcement stance on the Corporate Transparency Act (Act).

The press release stated the Treasury Department will not enforce penalties or fines associated with the beneficial ownership information (BOI) reporting rule under the existing regulatory guidelines.  The press release also said the Treasury Department will refrain from enforcing any penalties or fines against U.S. citizens, domestic reporting companies, or their beneficial owners after the upcoming rule changes take effect.

To clarify this last point, the Treasury Department  explained  it will be “issuing a proposed rulemaking that will narrow the scope of the rule to foreign reporting companies only.  Treasury takes this step in the interest of supporting hard-working American taxpayers and small businesses and ensuring that the rule is appropriately tailored to advance the public interest.”

While the official rule is still forthcoming, this press release shows that the Treasury Department is moving toward tailoring the Act so that it does not apply to U.S. citizens or domestic reporting companies.  Once the official rule is implemented, it is anticipated the Act will no longer apply to domestic reporting companies, including common interest developments.

Secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessent stated, “This is a victory for common sense.”

This continues to be a developing issue and common interest development boards should anticipate updates as the official rule has not yet been implemented.

EFFORTS BY COMMUNITY ASSOCIATIONS INSTITUTE

The Community Associations Institute (CAI) has spent much of the past two years advocating for common interest developments.  CAI filed a lawsuit challenging the application of the Act on common interest developments and utilized lobbying and advocacy efforts in Washington D.C. to encourage Congress to repeal the Act, exempt common interest developments, or delay the first reporting date.  Epsten, APC thanks CAI for its diligent efforts to protect common interest developments.

Updates on The Corporate Transparency Act as of 2/19/2025

Kieran J. Purcell, Esq., CCAL

Managing Shareholder

858.527.0111
Email
Practices: Community Association Counsel 

Share this article:

 

CORPORATE TRANSPARENCY ACT REPORTING REQUIREMENTS REINSTATED

On February 17, 2025, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas stayed a nationwide injunction halting enforcement of the Corporate Transparency Act (Act) in Smith v. United States Department of Treasury. The Eastern District of Texas’ decision cited the recent Supreme Court of the United States’ Texas Top Cop Shop, Inc. v. McHenry—formerly, Texas Top Cop Shop v. Garland decision as precedent.

The Smith nationwide injunction was the last remaining order pausing beneficial ownership reporting requirements. The Eastern District of Texas’ decision in Smith means common interest developments which meet FinCEN’s “reporting company” definition must file a beneficial ownership information (BOI) report within the filing deadlines. Click here for more information to help you determine if your common interest development is a “reporting company.”

UPDATED DEADLINE TO FILE – 12:00 PM EASTERN, MARCH 21, 2025

On February 19, 2025, FinCEN issued an alert regarding the Act.  FinCEN stated that the decision by the Eastern District of Texas reinstated reporting requirements under the Act.  However,  the Department of the Treasury recognized  some reporting companies may need additional time to comply with reporting obligations, so FinCEN generally extended the deadline 30 calendar days to 12:00 pm Eastern, March 21, 2025.

If your association was previously given a later deadline by the Department of the Treasury, the later deadline should still be met. These extensions were granted for various reasons, including certain disaster relief extensions. However, for most reporting companies, the deadline to file beneficial owner information reports is March 21, 2025.

IS THERE STILL HOPE THE REQUIREMENTS WILL CHANGE BEFORE THE DEADLINE?

Status of CAI’s CTA Lawsuit, Lobbying, and Advocacy Efforts

As you may recall, the Community Associations Institute (CAI) filed a lawsuit challenging the application of the Act on common interest developments.  CAI requested a preliminary injunction, but that request was denied by a federal judge.  CAI appealed the denial and the government responded to the appeal on February 7, 2025. CAI’s response is due at the end of February.

In addition, CAI is continuing to utilize lobbying and advocacy efforts in Washington D.C. to encourage Congress to repeal the Act, exempt common interest developments from the Act’s reporting requirements, or delay the first reporting date.  H.R. 736 and S. 505 are two bills that were recently introduced to seek a one-year delay of the CTA reporting requirements.

If you are interested in assisting with CAI’s efforts, visit CAI’s Action Center for information about how to contact your  Congress person and Senators to ask them to support H.R. 736 and S. 505.

This continues to be a developing issue. Common interest development boards should continue to remain informed and should be prepared to file any required reports prior to FinCEN’s March 21, 2025 deadline.

 

 

*This article is an update to the previous versions:

 

Safeguards for Volunteer Directors

Community associations are governed by boards of directors made up of volunteers. The role of these volunteers is crucial to keeping community associations functioning, but potential volunteers are often dissuaded by their fear of potential liability. This is a misconception. California law has evolved considerably to provide a robust framework of shields for volunteer directors. This article explores the statutory protections, insurance options, and governing document provisions that together safeguard volunteer directors, ensuring they can perform their essential roles without undue personal risk.

What is a volunteer?
Corporations Code section 5239(b) defines “volunteer” as “the rendering of services without compensation.” “Compensation” is further defined as “remuneration whether by way of salary, fee, or other consideration for services rendered.” However, the Corporations Code specifically allows for the payment of per diem, mileage, or other reimbursement expenses. While it may be tempting to offer perks to get owners in the community to participate on the Board, community association Boards should be careful to avoid offering any perks that could be considered compensation. For example, assigned parking spaces could arguably be consideration for services rendered as parking spaces have a monetary value.

Statutory Protections
Public Policy
Corporations Code section 5047.5(a) addresses the services of directors and officers of nonprofit corporations as “critical to the efficient conduct and management of the public service and charitable affairs of the people of California.” This Corporations Code section also codifies as California public policy the state’s decision “to provide incentive and protection to the individuals who perform these important functions.”

Business Judgment Rule
Corporations Code section 7231 establishes the Business Judgment Rule which protects directors from personal liability when the directors perform their duties in good faith, in a manner such directors believe to be in the best interests of the corporation, and with such care, including reasonable inquiry, as an ordinarily prudent person in a similar position would in similar circumstances.

Civil Code Section 5800
Civil Code section 5800 provides additional protections for volunteer directors who own no more than two (2) homes within the community. Volunteer directors and officers are not personally liable in excess of the community association’s insurance coverage so long as the community association has maintained the minimum levels of general liability and D&O insurance as required by law and the volunteer directors and officers’ actions were performed in good faith, within the scope of their duties, and were not willful, wanton, or grossly negligent.

Directors and Officers Insurance
Directors and Officers Insurance, commonly referred to as D&O insurance, protects both the community association from liability and volunteer directors and officers from personal liability for errors and omissions made by directors and officers while they were serving on the Board. All community associations are required by law to maintain minimum levels of D&O insurance.

Governing Documents
In addition to statutory protections and D&O insurance, volunteer directors may also find additional protections in their community association’s CC&Rs and/or Bylaws. Some, but not all, CC&Rs and Bylaws contain indemnity provisions that offer protections for directors and officers against their negligence and omissions. Since every community association has unique CC&Rs and Bylaws, each community association should consult with their legal representation to see whether there are protections for the volunteer directors.

Conclusion
Potential Board members should not let fear of personal liability keep them from running for the Board. So long as their Association retains the adequate amount of D&O insurance and they perform their duties in good faith, in a manner they believe to be in the best interests of the corporation, and with such care, including reasonable inquiry, as an ordinarily prudent person in a similar position would in similar circumstances, California law, D&O insurance, and potentially even the governing documents will provide protections against personal liability.

Updates on The Corporate Transparency Act as of 1/30/2025

Kieran J. Purcell, Esq., CCAL

Managing Shareholder

858.527.0111
Email
Practices: Community Association Counsel 

Share this article:

CORPORATE TRANSPARENCY ACT REPORTING REQUIREMENTS REMAIN PAUSED

 

On January 23, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court stayed a nationwide injunction halting enforcement of the Corporate Transparency Act (Act) in Texas Top Cop Shop, Inc. v. McHenry—formerly, Texas Top Cop Shop v. Garland. This decision appears at first glance to require that common interest developments comply with the Act.  However, Texas Top Cop Shop is not the only case currently making its way through the judicial system.  A  different federal judge in Texas imposed a similar nationwide injunction in Smith v. U.S. Department of the Treasury.  The Smith nationwide injunction still remains in place.

On January 24, 2025, FinCEN issued an alert confirming that despite the U.S. Supreme Court’s action in Texas Top Cop Shop, while the Smith order remains in place, reporting companies are not currently required to file beneficial ownership information (BOI) reports with FinCEN and are not subject to liability for failure to do so. That said, FinCEN reiterated that reporting companies may continue to voluntarily submit beneficial ownership information reports.

At present, the Smith nationwide injunction means the reporting requirements for applicable common interest developments are currently “on hold” and thus applicable common interest developments are not currently subject to liability for failure to meet filing deadlines.

Common interest development boards should continue to remain informed and prepared to act quickly to meet filing deadlines as needed.  Our office will continue to provide updates as they arise.

Status of CAI’s CTA Lawsuit, Lobbying and Advocacy Efforts

As you may be aware, the Community Associations Institute (CAI) filed a lawsuit challenging the application of the Act on common interest developments.  CAI requested a preliminary injunction but that request was denied by a federal judge.  CAI appealed and the government’s response to CAI’s appeal is due on January 31, 2025.

In addition, CAI is utilizing lobbying and advocacy efforts in Washington D.C. to encourage legislators to either repeal the Act or exempt common interest developments from the Act’s reporting requirements. H.R. 425 and S. 100 are two bills that were introduced to repeal the Act.

If you are interested in assisting with CAI’s efforts, visit CAI’s Action Center for information about how to contact your Members of Congress and Senators to ask them to support H.R. 425 and S. 100.

For additional information and updates regarding the Act and CAI’s efforts to repeal the Act or exempt applicable common interest developments visit www.caionline.org/CTA.

Updates on The Corporate Transparency Act as of 12/27/2024

 

*This article is an update to the previous versions:

FIFTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS REINSTATES NATIONWIDE PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION OF THE CORPORATE TRANSPARENCY ACT

On December 26, 2024, the full panel of the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals (“Fifth Circuit”) vacated the December 23, 2024 decision by a three judge panel to stay the preliminary nationwide injunction against the Corporate Transparency Act (“Act”) created by the December 3, 2024 ruling in Texas Top Cop Shop, Inc., et al. v. Garland, et al.  The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals court order can be read here. Please note this order simply reinstates the initial preliminary injunction and is still not a final ruling on the Act’s constitutionality.

At present, the Fifth Circuit’s order means the reporting requirements for applicable community associations are currently “on hold” and applicable community associations are not currently required to meet the January deadlines for filing.

The Fifth Circuit is expediting the government’s appeal and additional developments are imminent.  Our office will continue to provide updates as they arise.  However, community association boards should continue to closely monitor the developments and remain prepared to meet applicable filing deadlines if the filing requirements are reinstated.

For additional information and updates on the Texas Top Cop Shop case appeal and its applicability to the Act visit www.caionline.org/CTA.

Victoria R. Minor, Esq.

Victoria R. Minor, Esq.

Attorney at Law

Leave a message

Legal Assistant:  Natalie Hasson

Facebook Instagram Linkedin Id-card

Community Association Counsel

San Diego County Bar Association

Community Association Institute (CAI)

California Western School of Law

University of North Dakota

Victoria is a member of the firm’s transactional team. She handles matters involving governing document compliance and interpretation, including drafting letters to homeowners regarding governing document violations, assisting Boards in drafting special and emergency assessments, attending board meetings, executive committee sessions and hearings, and researching relevant statutes, codes, and case law to help Associations best manage their communities by the law.

Victoria is committed to providing the best experience for all clients and ensuring that their needs are met. Her goal is to help clients create healthy environments within their communities and assist associations by proactively and efficiently advising clients on any potential issues to hopefully avoid litigation. Victoria places a strong emphasis on guiding clients on best practices for managing their communities.

As a law clerk, she assisted attorneys with representing community associations throughout San Diego, Orange, and Riverside County. This opportunity allowed her to gain experience in interpreting and enforcing governing documents and in assisting with corporate governance.

While attending law school, she served as Vice President of Sports of the CWSL Entertainment and Sports Law Society. She also participated in the school-wide Appellate Oral Advocacy Competition, winning first place.

Victoria received the Academic Excellence award for her outstanding course performance in California Evidence and Legal Skills I. She was also a recipient of the Distinguished Advocate Award and was named to the Dean’s Honor List.

During her undergraduate studies, Victoria competed in Division I Women’s Softball. She was named to the President’s Honor Roll and the Dean’s List during her Freshman through Junior year. Victoria was awarded the Big Sky Conference All-Academic Award as a Freshman and Sophomore and was named to the Summit League Commissioner’s Academic List as a Junior and Senior. Victoria also served as Vice President of the UND Pre-Law Society during her Sophomore through Senior year.

Academic Excellence, California Western School of Law

Related Insights

News

Get legal updates straight to your inbox.

Our newsletter highlight community association best practices, new developments in the laws affecting associations, and sheds light on topics of concern and relevance to those involved in association management.

Sign up

Victoria R. Minor Joins Epsten, APC

Epsten, APC is pleased to announce the addition of Associate Attorney Victoria R. Minor to the firm’s San Diego office. Victoria is a member of the firm’s Transactional Department.

“We welcome Victoria, who initially began working with Epsten, APC as a Post Bar Law Clerk. We are eager to work with her and to continue to support her professional journey. Welcome to the team Victoria!,” said Kieran Purcell, Esq., CCAL, Managing Shareholder.

Victoria handles matters involving governing document compliance and interpretation, including drafting letters to homeowners regarding governing document violations, assisting Boards in drafting special and emergency assessments, attending board meetings, executive committee sessions, and hearings, and researching relevant statutes, codes, and case law to help community associations best manage their communities by the law.

“We look forward to supporting Victoria as she grows her career and collaborates with team members to provide exceptional service to our clients,” said Carolyn D. Decker, Chief Operating Officer.

As an attorney, Victoria is committed to providing the best experience for all clients and ensuring that their needs are met. Her goal is to help clients create healthy environments within their communities and assist associations by proactively and efficiently advising clients on any potential issues to hopefully avoid litigation. Victoria places a strong emphasis on guiding clients on best practices for managing their communities.