This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Real Property
Partition
Land Use

S.V.D.P. Management Inc. v. Tom C. Dyke, individually and as Trustee of the Tom C. Dyke Revocable Trust of Dec. 20, 2001

Published: Aug. 12, 2003 | Result Date: Apr. 29, 2003 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: DUM0002635 –  $0

Judge

Victor E. Bianchini

Court

San Diego Superior


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Christopher Barnette


Defendant

Jeffrey B. Gardner
(Barry Gardner & Kincannon APC)


Facts

The defendant donated his interest in about 625 acres of land to the plaintiff in 1998. The land consisted of approximately 400 acres known as the Northern Property and approximately 200 acres known as the Southern Property. The defendant's ex-wife owned one-half of the land. The plaintiff purchased her half for $800,000. The plaintiff planned to develop a "Childrens' Village" on the Southern property. An adjacent property, "The Bohannan Ranch," was bought by the defendant and two others with the intention of leasing that property to the plaintiff. The Bohannan Ranch would allow road access to the Childrens' Village property. Once the property was improved, the defendant then intended to donate the Bohannan Ranch to the plaintiff for the charitable tax deduction. The two other owners of the Bohannan Ranch donated their 2/3 interest in the property to the plaintiff, making the plaintiff and the defendant tenants-in-common, with the plaintiff owing 2/3 and the defendant owning 1/3. During the negotiations to develop the property, the defendant felt that his ideas were being ignored and that the project was taking too much time and too much money. He then refused to donate his 1/3 of the Bohannan Ranch although the other two owners had already donated their 2/3 interest to the plaintiff. The plaintiff filed an action to partition the Bohannan Ranch property.

Settlement Discussions

The plaintiff demanded a physical partition of the land. The defendant refused to partition the land.

Damages

The plaintiff is unable to develop the Children's Village unless the defendant donates his 1/3 interest in the Bohannan Ranch or his 1/3 interest be partitioned and the property physically divided because the Childrens' Village property is landlocked by the Bohannan Ranch and there would be no access to the highway.


#110262

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390