Levy v. Alexander
Filed 3/15/06 Levy v. Alexander CA2/2
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION TWO
| ILAN LEVY et al., Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. JOHN R. ALEXANDER et al., Defendants and Appellants. | B178880 (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. LC063101) |
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County.
Ruth Essegian, Judge. Affirmed.
Shane & Digiuseppe, Stephen A. Digiuseppe for Defendants and Appellants.
Riley & Associates, Grant K. Riley for Plaintiffs and Respondents.
___________________________________________________
The purchasers of real property obtained a judgment for specific performance, compelling the sellers to convey title to them. The parties' real estate agreement required the purchasers to bear all the costs of obtaining government approval to subdivide the sellers' large lot into three parcels. Escrow continued for several years, while the parties sought subdivision map approval. Soon after the subdivision was achieved, the sellers declined to go through with the transaction. We affirm the judgment in favor of the purchasers.
FACTS
Appellants John and Kathryn Alexander are the owners of real property in Sherman Oaks that is 27,000 square feet in size (the property). After purchasing the property in 1998, the Alexanders decided to subdivide and sell part of it. In 1999, respondents Ilan and Miriam Levy agreed to purchase the undeveloped portion of the property for $285,000. The Levys made a downpayment of $8,500 to start escrow. The agreement was contingent upon obtaining government approval to subdivide the property into multiple buildable lots, with the Levys paying all costs associated with the subdivision.
As discussed in greater detail below, the Alexanders ultimately cancelled the transaction after the subdivision process was completed, and the Levys responded with this lawsuit for specific performance.
The dispute was tried by the court in March 2004. At the outset, it became clear that the purchase contract, which was composed of an offer and a counteroffer, was not signed by all of the parties. Ilan Levy signed the offer, but his wife did not. The counteroffer was signed only by Kathryn Alexander and Ilan Levy. To resolve this problem, defense counsel proposed a stipulation that the purchase agreement â€
