Sousa v. Sinsheimer
Before: York
YORK, P. J. This is an action in partition with respect to four parcels of real property situate in the county of San Luis Obispo, to wit:
1. A group of eight lots in the town of Horro;
2. A 1,204-acre tract, called the “Mountain Ranch”;
3. A 193-acre tract, known as “Lot 23”;
4. A 755-acre tract, referred to as the “Home Ranch.”
Defendant L. F. Sinsheimer had no interest in parcel 1, but owned an undivided 6/44th part of parcels 2, 3 and 4; and defendant Sinsheimer Bros, owned an undivided 4/44ths interest in parcels 1, 2, 3 and 4.
The trial court appointed three referees to sell parcel 1 and to partition the remaining three parcels in kind among the plaintiffs and defendants. Parcel 1 was sold for an aggregate sum of $2,880. The two defendants, L. F. Sinsheimer and Sinsheimer Bros., a corporation, stipulated that any property partitioned to them be set apart to them jointly as tenants in common in the proportion of 3/5ths to L. F. Sinsheimer and 2/5ths to the corporation.
After making its findings of fact, the trial court concluded that the proceeds of the sale of parcel 1 “should be paid by said referees to the clerk of this court to be held subject to the further order of this court.”
The interlocutory decree in partition sets out the respective interest of each party in the four parcels of land, and then decrees as follows:
“II. That there are no Valid liens or encumbrances against said property, except taxes” against parcels 2, 3 and 4, which, including penalties, amounted to the sum of $1,888.67.
“III. That the services of Messrs. Schauer, Ryon & McMahon, as counsel for plaintiffs, and of O. P. Kaetzel, Esq., as counsel for defendant Sinsheimer Bros., a corporation, and of Albert Nelson, Esq., as counsel for the defendant, L. F. Sinsheimer, together with the plaintiffs’ expense of title of the Security Title Insurance and Guarantee Company, costs of partition, compensation of the Referee . . . and costs of the suit of the respective parties are all for the mutual benefit of the owners of said property, and the compensation and costs thereof are by this court adjudged as a lien against said property and the proceeds of sale thereof; that pursuant to stipulation between counsel for plaintiffs and defendants, the court reserves the right to receive proof and make its order in reference to said compensation, costs and expense.. ..
More from California Court of Appeal
- People v. Hill (1998)
- In Re Autumn H. (1994)
- Nwosu v. Uba (2004)
- In Re Casey D. (1999)
- Santisas v. Goodin (1998)
- Cahill v. San Diego Gas & Electric Co. (2011)
- People v. Rivera (2015)
- People v. Barnett (1998)
- People v. Serrano (2012)
- Benach v. County of Los Angeles (2007)