In Young v. Heins, Young brought third-party claims against the board of trustees of a nonprofit home owner association for breach of fiduciary duty, breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing, breach of contract, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and for a declaratory judgment. No. 01-15-00500-CV, 2017 Tex. App. LEXIS 5075 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] June 1, 2017, no pet. history). In his claims for breach of fiduciary duty and the duty of good faith and fair dealing, Young argued that because the trustees had a fiduciary relationship with him, they owed him a “duty to refrain from self-dealing, a duty of care and loyalty, a duty of full disclosure, a duty to act with the strictest integrity, and the duty of fair, honest dealing.” Id. Young further argued that they breached their duties to him because they had claimed that he had violated deed restrictions, knowing that he had not done so, and claimed that he had not timely paid his maintenance assessments, knowing that he had in fact paid them. The trustees filed a summary judgment motion, which the trial court granted. The court of appeals noted that the association’s bylaws, states that the affairs of the association “shall be managed by a Board of five . . . trustees, who need not be members of the Association.” But the court held that the mere use of the word “trustee,” does not create a trust or a trustee relationship. Id. (citing Nolana Dev. Ass’n. v. Corsi, 682 S.W.2d 246, 249 (Tex. 1984); Stauffacher v. Coadum Cap. Fund 1, LLC, 344 S.W.3d 584, 588-89 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2011, pet. denied)). The court concluded that “the duties that a trustee has to a trust do not apply to a director of a nonprofit corporation.” Id. The court affirmed the summary judgment for the board of trustee members.