A Georgia condo association won $98,650 from the neighbour whose runoff eroded its common areas
A Georgia condo association won $98,650 from the neighbour whose runoff eroded its common areas
2026-09-10 · Georgia · Courts
What happened. One of the few Georgia community-association decisions of the period in which the association is the plaintiff, protecting common property against an outside actor rather than fighting its own members — and it won.
Rainbow Real Investors, LP v. Red Oak Village Condominium Association, Inc., No. A25A0811, decided 4 August 2025. Barnes, P.J., with Brown, C.J., and Watkins, J., concurring. Published; affirmed.1
The facts
Red Oak Village Condominium Association in Athens-Clarke County maintains the common areas — parking lot, landscaping and stormwater drainage.
Rainbow Real Investors owns the uphill adjacent parcel, leased to a skilled nursing and rehabilitation centre, and holds no drainage easement over the association's common areas.
The association sued in April 2023, alleging that Rainbow's acts and omissions had caused “the flow of water from [Rainbow's] property [to be] concentrated, increased by artificial means, and diverted onto the common [areas],” producing ongoing erosion and sedimentation. It pleaded continuing nuisance and trespass and sought damages, attorney's fees under O.C.G.A. § 13-6-11, and a permanent injunction.
The default
Rainbow was served on 18 April 2023 and never answered. The case went into automatic default. Its motion to open default was denied. The association then won summary judgment on damages, seeking $98,650 among other damages, plus § 13-6-11 fees.
The Court of Appeals affirmed both the refusal to open default and the summary judgment, treating the default as admitting liability for trespass and continuing nuisance, and noting that cost of restoration is “an appropriate measure of damages in cases involving a continuing nuisance or trespass.”
The Georgia drainage rule underneath
Georgia follows the rule that an uphill owner may not concentrate, increase by artificial means, or divert surface water onto a neighbour. Natural flow is one thing; channelised or augmented flow is another.
The association's pleading tracks that formula exactly, which is why the default admitted a viable claim rather than a defective one.
Keep reading with the Georgia State Pass
The rest of this analysis — what an association can actually do, the recent bills and rulings, and how Georgia compares nationally — is for subscribers. $49/month for every Georgia topic on HOA Weekly.
$49/month, $449/year, or a $19.99 day pass.
What you unlock
- Why this matters more in Georgia than it looks
- What a board needs to show before suing
- The default is the reason this was cheap
and 2 more sections in detail
Already a subscriber? Sign in
Recurring monthly subscription · Cancel anytime · Need help?
Related Georgia HOA Topics
- Rainbow Real Investors, LP v. Red Oak Village Condominium Association, Inc., No. A25A0811 (Ga. Ct. App. 4 Aug. 2025) — slip opinion ↩
- Lofts of East Point Condominium Association v. Blackmon, No. A25A0449 (Ga. Ct. App. 11 Apr. 2025) — slip opinion ↩
- Senate Bill 406, as passed (26 LC 49 2879S) — signed copy, Office of the Governor ↩
Stay on top of Georgia HOA law
Every week: new Georgia legislation, court rulings, and regulatory developments affecting condos, planned communities, and property managers. Free.
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.