Casey v. Owen CA3

Filed 3/11/14 Casey v. Owen CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Shasta) ----

WILLIAM J. CASEY, as Trustee, etc., et al., C069340

Plaintiffs, Cross-defendants and (Super. Ct. No. 169950) Respondents,

v.

BRENT OWEN et al.,

Defendants, Cross-complainants and Appellants;

HPD BOLES CREEK, L.P.,

Cross-defendant and Respondent.

In 1979 Brent Owen, Kenneth Whitmire, and John Dunlap agreed to form a general partnership, Rural Housing I, to construct and operate a 50 unit low-income apartment complex. The United States Farmers Home Administration (Home

1

Administration) regulated and subsidized the venture. Prior to completion of construction, Whitmire transferred his interest in Rural Housing I to Tri Counties Bank. Home Administration did not authorize the bank as a partner, and the bank transferred its interest to its board of directors, a transfer approved by Home Administration. Eventually, Everett B. Beich; Vernon E. Fish; Donald J. Casey, M.D.; and J. Herod Hall, M.D., transferred their interests to new entities, none of whom were approved by the Home Administration. The new entities consisted of Brent Owen; John P. Dunlap; Geraldine F. Pearson, Trustee of Marie H. Fish Trust Dated 10/29/03, and as Trustee of the Vernon E. Fish Marital Trust; Everett B. Beich, Trustee of the Trust of Everett B. Beich, Dated 9/5/91; William J. and Stephen S. Casey, Trustees of the Casey Family Trust of 1990; Anna Lou Hall, Trustee of the Hall Family Trust; Robert H. and Patricia A. Steveson, Co-Trustees of the Robert H. Steveson and Patricia A. Steveson Revocable Trust; and Anna Lou Hall, Partner of the Hall Family Partnership. In 2009 Rural Housing I decided to sell the apartment complex to cross-defendant HPD Boles Creek, L.P., a California limited partnership (cross-defendant). Following the sale, William Casey, Stephen Casey, Hall, Robert Steveson, Patricia Steveson, Pearson, and Beich (collectively, plaintiffs) filed a complaint for dissolution of the partnership and for declaratory relief. Owen and Dunlap (defendants) filed a cross-complaint seeking to rescind the sale and also seeking declaratory relief. Plaintiffs brought a motion for summary judgment, which the trial court granted. Defendants appeal, arguing plaintiffs were not partners of the partnership because they were not approved by the Home Administration or its successor, the Office of Rural Development. Defendants also challenge the court’s denial of their motions to file an amended cross-complaint and to continue trial. We shall affirm the judgment. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND In 1979 Owen, Dunlap, and Whitmire entered into a partnership agreement to form a general partnership known as Rural Housing I. The purpose of the partnership