Masha Davis Won Her Six-Year Fight With Her Austin HOA Over a 160-Square-Foot Backyard Office, and the Bill Has Reached $153,264

Masha Davis only wanted a small office behind her house in Austin, Texas. Six years, two trial rulings and one appeal later, the homeowners association that told her no owes about $153,264, and the neighbors who pay dues into it are asking who covers the bill.

The fight started with a 10-by-16-foot building in a backyard in the Davis Spring subdivision, a community of about 570 homes. It ended with a unanimous appeals court ruling in September and a judgment that grows by roughly $34 every day it goes unpaid.

A 160-Square-Foot Plan the Committee Turned Down

In July 2020, Davis submitted plans to her HOA’s architectural review committee for a detached backyard office measuring 10 by 16 feet, with a roof height of 9 feet, 6 inches, according to the New York Post’s report, syndicated on Yahoo News. The building would have electricity and air conditioning but no plumbing.

The committee rejected it. It pointed to the structure’s height and to a concern that the office could become a separate dwelling, which would clash with the neighborhood’s single-family restrictions. Davis had resigned that same month as vice president of the HOA board.

Davis did not drop the project. In January 2021, she sued the association.

Two Rulings in Williamson County

The case moved slowly through Williamson County district court. In August 2022, the court ruled that the design guidelines in force when Davis applied contained no height restriction that blocked the office, and that the committee lacked the authority to reject her plans on that basis, as Press News Agency’s summary of the case lays out.

A second ruling in January 2024 went further. The court found that no restrictive covenant barred the office as she had proposed it. It then awarded Davis $100,000 in attorney’s fees. Davis has said her actual legal costs came to about $150,000.

According to a case write-up from HOA Member Services, the trial court found the 2002 design guidelines were the only guidelines of record when the application went in, which is why the height-based denial did not hold.

The HOA Appealed the Fees and Lost Again

The association did not challenge the rulings that let the office be built. It appealed only the $100,000 fee award.

On Sept. 29, 2026, the Texas Third Court of Appeals unanimously upheld that award and added $30,000 in conditional appellate attorney’s fees. By Nov. 5, the total owed had reached $153,264 in fees, court costs and interest, Attack of the Fanboy reported, with interest adding about $34 a day.

Davis told the Post the association has agreed to pay and that an attorney has started collection. The HOA had not commented when the Post story ran.

Who Pays for a Backyard Fight

The bigger question now sits with the other homeowners. At a Nov. 3 board meeting, a former HOA president asked about the financial impact of the judgment, and Davis said the board offered no clear plan for covering it.

Davis has said the HOA’s legal defense was paid for by insurance. It is not clear whether that insurer will also cover the judgment, or whether the money will come out of the association’s own funds, which homeowners pay into through their dues.

“It’s their association and their money,” Davis said. She also said she kept fighting because she believed the association was wrong, and that “an HOA should have to follow the rules it expects its homeowners to follow.”

She is now pushing for changes to Texas HOA law, including more accountability for board directors and limits on insurance coverage for defense costs.

What Texas Law Already Says About Backyard Approvals

Backyard projects are a common source of HOA friction in Texas, where another association recently prevailed on appeal in the Conroe fight over a veteran’s bee colonies. Many associations require architectural approval before a homeowner puts up a permanent or semi-permanent structure such as a shed, with rules that can cover size, placement and appearance, according to a guide from FirstService Residential, which manages associations in the state.

The same guide notes that a backyard improvement is not automatically exempt just because it is hard to see from the street. It also points to Texas Property Code Section 209.00505, which lets homeowners in covered associations appeal a denied architectural application to the board.

The Austin case runs the other way. The courts found the committee had leaned on a height limit that was not in the guidelines of record when Davis applied, a complaint that echoes a native-garden owner whose HOA changed its rules after her plants bloomed.

For the people in Davis Spring, the lesson is a costly one. A 160-square-foot office that a committee said was too tall is now attached to a six-figure bill, and every day the association waits, the number climbs.

This article was produced with AI assistance and edited for accuracy against the sources linked above.

Image: PattayaPatrol – CC BY-SA 4.0/Wikimedia Commons