Selective enforcement is the argument that a board can't cite you for something, a fence, a parking spot, a rental, while knowingly letting the identical thing slide two doors down, and that the enforcement action itself becomes suspect for it. Mississippi has no section titled "selective enforcement," but § 89-9-17's own framing supplies real footing for the argument. The statute doesn't just say a declaration's restrictions are enforceable; it says they're enforceable as "equitable servitude[s]... where reasonable." That single word, "equitable," matters: equity is exactly the body of law that recognizes defenses like waiver, unclean hands, and estoppel when the party trying to enforce a rule hasn't applied it evenhandedly. A board that cherry-picks who it cites is straining the same "reasonable" equitable standard the statute itself uses to make the restriction enforceable in the first place.
This isn't a rewrite of the underlying rule you allegedly broke, it's a defense to enforcement, and like anywhere else, it lives or dies on documentation. Since Mississippi's statute gives you no dedicated records-inspection right (see the records guide), building the pattern here depends more on your own direct observation than on pulling the board's files, though the recorded declaration itself, and any recorded lien or assessment notices under § 89-9-21, are public and worth checking for whether penalties have landed unevenly.
Use what's actually public
You don't need the board's cooperation to check the condominium lien book at the chancery clerk under § 89-9-21; if you suspect penalties or liens have been recorded against some units for a violation but not others with the identical condition, that's a matter of public record, not something the board can withhold. Pair that with your own dated photographs of the comparable, uncited violations themselves, identified by unit number or address, never by the name of the owner living there.
The authority
The statutes behind this
Cited by name as authority, for your own reading. Informational only, not legal advice.
Miss. Code § 89-9-17
Frames every restriction as an "enforceable equitable servitude... where reasonable," importing equity's own defenses, including uneven or arbitrary enforcement, into the reasonableness a chancery court would weigh.
Miss. Code § 89-9-21
Recorded notices of assessment, penalties, and liens are public in the county's condominium lien book, a source you can check independent of the board for a pattern of uneven enforcement.
Miss. Code § 89-9-27
Requires the declaration to be construed liberally to facilitate the project's operation, relevant context for how a court weighs an enforcement dispute against the declaration's overall purpose.
Step by step
How to document and raise selective enforcement in Mississippi
Build the evidentiary record that supports a selective-enforcement argument against a Mississippi condominium penalty or lien.
- 01
Identify the exact restriction and its source
Confirm the rule the board says you violated actually traces to the recorded declaration, not an unwritten board preference.
- 02
Photograph and date comparable violations
Document other units with the identical condition that were never cited, using unit numbers or addresses, not the names of the owners living there.
- 03
Check the public lien book
Ask the chancery clerk whether any notices of assessment or penalty were recorded under § 89-9-21 against the comparable units; an absence there supports the pattern.
- 04
Confirm the statute even applies to your community
Verify your project actually recorded a condominium plan under § 89-9-9; a subdivision HOA argues this as ordinary covenant law instead.
- 05
Raise the pattern as a reasonableness challenge
Present your documentation directly to the board in writing, framed against § 89-9-17's own "reasonable" standard, and preserve everything in case the dispute ends up before a chancery court.
Straight answers
Common questions
Is selective enforcement a real defense in Mississippi?
There's no statute naming it directly, but § 89-9-17's framing of restrictions as enforceable "equitable servitude[s]... where reasonable" imports equity's own defenses, including uneven enforcement, into that reasonableness standard.
What's the difference between waiver and selective enforcement?
Waiver argues the board let a restriction lapse broadly enough that it can't enforce it at all anymore. Selective enforcement is narrower: the rule may still be alive, but singling you out while ignoring identical violations elsewhere is inequitable. They often overlap.
What evidence do I actually need?
Dated photographs of comparable, uncited violations, identified by unit or address, and, where relevant, a check of the public condominium lien book for whether penalties or liens landed unevenly.
Should I name the neighbors who weren't cited?
No. Document properties by unit number or address, not the individuals living there, keeping the focus on the board's own inconsistent conduct.