|FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT
COUNTY OF SANTA FE
STATE OF NEW MEXICO
Washington Mutual Bank, F.A.,
Successor by merger to Bank United,
Karen M. Kline,
Karen M. Kline
Third Party Plaintiff
City of Santa Fe, E. W. Sargent,
Manhattan Condominium Unit Owners’ Association,
Dorrie Deal, Robert Horestler, Robert Hunt, Linda Hunt,
Sole Two Crow, Ed Crocker, Accent Property Management,
Somers Law Firm, Shapiro and Meinhold, Wells Fargo,
Third Party Defendants,
COMES NOW Defendant pro se, Karen Kline, as Third Party Plaintiff, and amends the Complaint to read as
1. Plaintiff, Karen Kline, is a resident of Santa Fe County.
2. Defendant, the City of Santa Fe, is in Santa Fe County.
3. Defendant, E.W. Sargent, does business in Santa Fe County as a Realtor and the Broker of Santa Fe
4. Defendant, Manhattan Condominium Unit Owners’ Association, is organized in Santa Fe County.
5. Defendant, Dorrie Deal, owns a condo at 729 W. Manhattan, Santa Fe, in Santa Fe County.
6. Defendant, Robert Hoerstler, owns a condo together with his wife, Dorrie Deal, at 729 W. Manhattan,
Santa Fe, in Santa Fe County.
7. Defendant, Robert Hunt, is a resident of Durango, Colorado but owns a condo at 729 W. Manhattan in
Santa Fe, Santa Fe County, in which he also resides.
8. Defendant, Linda Hunt is a resident of Durango, Colorado but owns with her husband a condo at 729 W.
Manhattan in Santa Fe, Santa Fe County, in which she also resides.
9. Defendant, Sole Two Crow, owns two condos at 729 W. Manhattan, Santa Fe, in Santa Fe County.
10. Defendant, Accent Property Management does business in Santa Fe County.
11. Defendant, Sommer Law firm is in Santa Fe County and has lawyers Karl Sommer and Kurt Somer.
12. Third party defendants Manhattan Condominium Unit Owners’ Association, Dorrie Deal, Robert
Horestler, Robert Hunt, Linda Hunt, and Sole Two Crow, by willfully and maliciously refusing to pay what
they owe have caused this foreclosure action.
13. The nature of this case is that I have a case for damages because my home, a condo, was permitted to
be built over a privy pit that was not disclosed to me and caused damage, and as a result I am in financial
14. My health has been damaged by toxic fumes caused by the privy pit.
15. All the condo owners own the lot where the privy pit was located.
16. The condo association has a duty to take care of the common area.
17. The association officers have a duty to fulfill their offices and their failure to do so has hurt and
18. Somer Law Firm attorneys re-wrote the bylaws so that I was denied any say in my property, which has
harmed and damaged me.
19. The property management business has agreed to take care of the common areas, but it hasn’t, which
is damaging me.
20. Ed Crocker said that the pier he installed was compromised due to where it was placed.
21. Wells Fargo mismanaged my money in several transactions impacting this foreclosure.
22. During my bankruptcy the Shapiro and Meinhold lawyer lied to me about liability of her client, this lie
has impacted my ability to fulfill my plan and attain the financial security meant to be provided by chapter ll.
WHEREFORE damages should be awarded me to remedy the injuries and damages I am suffering, and
costs should be awarded to me.
Karen Marie Kline
, Santa Fe, New Mexico 87507
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE:
I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing was mailed on September 23, 2004, to:
Sharon Hankla and Kelly J. McMullen @ Shapiro & Meinhold
13725 Struthers Road, CO 80921
Manhattan Condominium Unit Owner’s Association, 729 W. Manhattan Unit # 2, Santa Fe, NM 87501
Address of Registered Agent, Robert Hunt
Sole Two Crow,
Because I don’t have enough money for all of the service and copies until after I get next month’s rent,
I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing will be mailed on October 4, 2004, to:
City of Santa Fe, 200 Lincoln Ave., Santa Fe, New Mexico 87501
E.W. Sargent, 1000 Paseo de Peralta, Santa Fe, New Mexico 87501
Ed Crocker, 227 E. Palace, Suite O, Santa Fe, New Mexico 87501
Accent Property Management, 1050 Paseo de Peralta, Santa Fe, New Mexico 87501
Sommer Law Firm, 200 W. Marcy, Santa Fe, New Mexico 87501
Wells Fargo, Secretary of State for the State of New Mexico, 325 Don Gaspar, Suite 300
|AMENDED THIRD PARTY COMPLAINT IN RELATION TO
DEFENDANTS MANHATTAN CONDOMINIUM UNIT OWNERS’ ASSOCIATION,
DORRIE DEAL, ROBERT HOERSTLER, ROBERT HUNT, LINDA HUNT AND SOLE TWO CROW
|47-7A-12. Unconscionable agreement or term of contract.
A. The court, upon finding as a matter of law that a contract or contract clause was
unconscionable at the time the contract was made, may refuse to enforce the contract,
enforce the remainder of the contract without the unconscionable clause or limit the
application of any unconscionable clause in order to avoid an unconscionable
B. Whenever it is claimed, or appears to the court, that a contract or any contract
clause is or may be unconscionable, the parties, in order to aid the court in making the
determination, shall be afforded a reasonable opportunity to present evidence as to
(1) the commercial setting of the negotiations;
(2) whether a party has knowingly taken advantage of the inability of the other
party reasonably to protect his interests by reason of physical or mental infirmity,
illiteracy or inability to understand the language of the agreement or similar factors; and
(3) the effect and purpose of the contract or clause.
47-7A-13. Obligation of good faith.
Every contract or duty governed by the Condominium Act [47-7A-1 to 47-7D-20 NMSA
1978] imposes an obligation of good faith in its performance or
47-7A-14. Remedies to be liberally administered.
A. The remedies provided by the Condominium Act [47-7A-1 to 47-7D-20 NMSA
1978] shall be liberally administered in order that the aggrieved party is placed in as good
a position as if the other party had fully performed. However, consequential, special or
punitive damages shall not be awarded except as specifically provided in the
Condominium Act or by other law.
B. Any right or obligation declared by the Condominium Act is enforceable by judicial
|A. Except to the extent provided by the declaration, Subsection B of this section or
Section 46 [47-7C-13 NMSA 1978] of the Condominium Act, the association is
responsible for maintenance, repair and replacement of the common elements,
|Notwithstanding the ownership of various portions of the Common Elements and the Units by virtue
of the foregoing boundary description, the provisions of the Bylaws shall govern the division of
maintenance and repair responsibilities between the Unit Owner and the Association.”
|The Board of Directors shall be responsible for the maintenance, repair, and replacement (unless, if in
the opinion of not less than two-thirds (2/3) of the Board of Directors such expense was necessitated
by the negligence, misuse, or neglect of a Unit Owner) of all of the Common Elements, but not the
Limited Common Elements, as defined herein or in the Declaration, the cost of repair of the Common
Elements shall be charged to all Unit Owners as a Common Expense;
|Background: The ADA, Title II