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
Purchase Agreement
Property Sale

Kezarian v. McGeoy, Hidalgo

Published: Jun. 15, 2002 | Result Date: Sep. 14, 2001 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: 00CC11177 Bench Decision –  $0

Judge

Eleanor M. Palk

Court

Orange Superior


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Chad T.W. Pratt


Facts

The plaintiffs were the tenants of real property. The defendant was the owner of the real property. At the time, the
parties entered into the purchase agreement tenants were on the property pursuant to a lease with an option to
renew. However, the plaintiffs had allegedly failed to renew the option, which had expired a few weeks prior to
the sale of the property. The owner allegedly disclosed the tenancy and provided the buyer with the lease. In
addition, the parties exchanged numerous letters through their respective attorneys disclosing the potential for a
claim by the tenants that the lease had been renewed orally.
The buyer acknowledged in writing that he would assume all liability for any claims made by the tenants
pursuant to the lease. However, after the transfer of the property to the buyer, the plaintiffs refused to vacate the
premises and filed this action to enforce the terms of their lease agreement and for a finding that the plaintiffs
had orally renewed their option. Despite the fact that the property had already been transferred to the buyer, the
plaintiffs sued the seller as well as the new owner seeking a right to remain on the premises.

Settlement Discussions

None by defendnat/cross defendant McGeoy.

Other Information

Cross-defendant McGeoy obtained a dismissal of the plaintiffsÆ claims against him per settlement. Thereafter, the cross-complainant Hidalgo obtained judgment through summary judgment on the basis that full and complete written disclosures were made to both cross-complainant Hidalgo and his counsel, which written disclosures were acknowledged and thereafter incorporated into the purchase agreement, and that the cross-complaint was without merit. On motion by McGeoy, McGeoy obtained an award of his attorney fees and costs against cross-complainant Hidalgo. A motion for attorney fees in the amount of $14,244 was granted in favor of the cross-complainant McGeoy. The defendant First Team Real Estate also obtained summary judgment against the cross-defendant Hidalgo on the grounds that the cross-complaint was without merit. The cross-defendant McGeoy obtained settlement dismissal of the complaint as against him filed by Kezarian and obtained judgment on motion for summary judgment against the cross-complainant Hidalgo.


#97607

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

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