Nature of the Case
To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.
Facts
D entered into an oral agreement with her parents, P, wherein D offered P the option of building an addition to her own home where they could live for the rest of their lives. In return for D's offer to let the parents build an addition to her home, P agreed to pay for the addition and agreed that D would acquire the addition, at no cost, upon their deaths. The addition consists of two bedrooms, a bathroom, and a living room with a kitchen. The addition is connected to the side of D's house, and the two areas share a common hallway. After the father's death, the relationship between the P and D deteriorated, and P eventually sued D to partition her interest in the addition from D's property interests. The court found that the parties' oral agreement regarding the addition implicitly created a limited life estate in P measured by their joint lives and that D held the remainder interest. 2 The court also found that the agreement prohibited either party from selling her interest in the addition. The court held that P impliedly waived any partition rights when she entered into the contract because partition would be 'a violation of the intent of the original agreement.' The court of appeals reversed. The court of appeals reversed. P had a statutory right to compel partition, interpreting section 38-28-101, 10 C.R.S.(2002), to allow partition between a successive, non-concurrent remainder interest in the addition. It reasoned that partition would not violate the intent of the original agreement because D would retain her contractual right to the monetary value of her remainder interest in the addition when their property interests were liquidated. D appealed.
Support@ bsmsphd.com
Casebriefs Co