Marla J. Diaz

Attorney in Falls Church, VA
Experience

Marla Diaz focuses her practice on representation of community associations throughout the Commonwealth of Virginia. She has significant trial and general litigation experience in the state and federal courts in the Commonwealth of Virginia, including litigating various community association issues, construction defect, commercial litigation, and real estate litigation. She also has significant experience representing community associations before various administrative boards, including the Virginia Fair Housing Board and various County Human Rights Commissions.

Community Associations
•Experienced in representing community associations throughout the Commonwealth of Virginia

Community Associations Litigation
•Represented community associations in a variety of litigation matters, including covenant enforcement, defense of federal and Virginia fair housing discrimination claims, defense of breach of contract claims brought by owners and defense of fiduciary duty claims against boards of directors. Ms. Diaz also represents community associations at the general district court level in assessment collection actions.

Contract Negotiations and Dispute Resolution
•Experienced in negotiating agreements for construction, maintenance and improvements of the common interest community association property and common facilities
•Represented community associations in conciliation proceedings related to federal and Virginia fair housing claims

Counsel to Boards of Directors
•Provides advice to boards of directors of community associations on many aspects of the day-to-day business of operating and governing a community association, including compliance with governing documents, operating procedures, meeting issues, compliance with Virginia statutes governing community associations, homeowner disputes, assessment collections, and various director issues

Delinquent Assessment Collection
•Regularly advises boards of directors on cost-effective delinquent assessment collection procedures and draft policy resolutions designed to better manage the association's collection efforts
•Oversees the delinquent assessment collections for various community associations and represents them in various court to collect the delinquent amounts owed to the association

Rules and Covenants Enforcement
•Advises community associations regarding changing case law and legislation effecting the covenant enforcement efforts of the associations
•Drafts policy resolutions regarding covenant enforcement and further assists enforcement of the association's covenants by instituting legal proceedings to enforce the covenants

Interpretation/Amendment of Governing Documents
•Experienced in providing interpretations of community association's governing documents and advising boards of directors regarding the actions they can and cannot take on behalf of the association
•Drafts amendments to governing documents to address the changing needs of community associations

Developer/Warranty Issues
•Advises community associations regarding claims against developers related to warranty issues and works with boards of directors to develop cost-efficient plans for addressing warranty claims

Estates and Trusts Litigation
•Has contested a suit that involved issues on holographic wills and partnership interests
•Had prepared numerous guardian and conservatorship petitions
•Defended a surety bond company in a breach of fiduciary duty claim against a conservator
•Litigated complex jurisdiction issues for probate of will on behalf of the wife of the decedent and did subsequent pre-litigation work on will contest issues raised by the children of the decedent
•Brought suit in an action to challenge the actions of a trustee and attorney-in-fact under a power of attorney

General Information
•Speaker on community association matters for the Washington Chapter of the Community Association's Institute
•Member: Fairfax Bar Association

Events
CA Roundtable Luncheon - WTP hosting
November 14, 2014 - 12:00pm - 1:30pm
Lunch Seminar for Virginia Managers - WTP hosted
September 25, 2014 - 12:00pm - 1:00pm
May It Please the Court: Effective Case Presentation at Trial - WTP speaker
June 26, 2014 - 8:30am - 9:15am

Articles
Understanding and Contrasting the ADA and FHA
WTP s Marla Diaz Wins Summary Judgment on BMA -- Renoir Case
The Critical Role of the Board in Amending Governing Documents

703.280.9131
Client Rating N/A help_info
Submit a client review

Peer Rating N/A help_info

Areas of Law

  • Community Associations
  • Community Association Litigation
  • Contract Negotiations and Dispute Resolution
  • Counsel to Boards of Directors
  • Estates & Trust Litigation
  • Delinquent Assessment Collection
  • Rules and Covenants Enforcement
  • Interpretation/Amendment of Governing Documents
  • Developer/Warranty Issues

 

Experience & Credentials

Position

Counsel

Admission Details

Admitted in 2001, Virginia
2005, North Carolina

Law School Attended

Wake Forest University School of Law
Class of 2001
J.D.
Member of Wake Forest Law Review: Dedicated Issue Editor 2000-2001, Member of Moot Court Board: Co-chair, Walker Competition 2000, Semi-finalist in Walker Competition, Spring 1999

University Attended

College of William and Mary
Class of 1997
B.S.
Buell Award for Outstanding Campus Achievement, William and Mary Honor Council: Chair 1996-1997, Member 1994-1997

Birth Information

Born in 1975
Alexandria, Virginia, 1975

Associations & Memberships

Fairfax, Norfolk-Portsmouth and Virginia Beach Bar Associations.

Contact Information

Phone

703.280.9131

Fax

703.280.8946

Email

Send email to Marla J. Diaz


Office Information
Marla J. Diaz
Counsel
 3190 Fairview Park Drive, Suite 300,
Falls Church, VA 22042

Maintains an office in multiple locations
Loading...

Logo
Whiteford, Taylor & Preston L.L.P. (Falls Church, Virginia)

About Client Rating
About Peer Rating

Welcome to Martindale-Hubbell® Client Review, a new ratings service that allows you to view and provide feedback on a lawyer or law firm on service and relationship qualities such as Communication Ability, Responsiveness, Quality of Service, and Value for Money.

Determining a Rating

The Client Review Rating is determined through aggregation of validated responses. This compilation of Client Reviews translates to a numerical rating and associate descriptive term on a scale of 1 -5. 1 being lowest as "Rated" and 5 being highest as "Preeminent".

  • 4.5-5.0 Preeminent
  • 3.0-4.4 Distinguished
  • 1-2.9 Rated

Martindale-Hubbell uses a third-party resource to validate that the respondent is a living person, but cannot confirm the lawyer/client relationship, which in many cases is confidential. Clients must affirm that they are a client of the lawyer or firm identified for review at the time of the completed Client Review.

The Reviewers

Those who complete Client Reviews are clients of law firms who hired a lawyer within the last year, whose matter is not pending, and want to share their experience of that lawyer or law firm with other potential clients. Reviewers can be of any type from in-house counsel, corporate executives, small business owners to private individuals, and even sometimes another lawyer in a different jurisdiction.

Anonymity

Client Reviews are anonymous and reviewers' identities are not published; however a summary of basic demographics will be part of the display of responses.

Why do we collect demographics as part of the review?

Those who are researching a lawyer or law firm like to see that there are other clients who might be "like them". This is valuable information contributing to the decision-making process of hiring a lawyer.

Martindale-Hubbell's role

Martindale-Hubbell facilitates the process of Client Review by gathering responses, validating them and aggregating results for display online. The content of the responses are entirely from reviewers, the clients of the firm or lawyer.

It is important to note that Martindale-Hubbell does not undertake to develop Client Reviews for all firms and lawyers. Therefore, the fact that a firm or lawyer has not been reviewed should not be construed unfavorably. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome and Martindale-Hubbell accepts no responsibility for the content or accuracy of any review over which Martindale-Hubbell exercises no editorial review or control.