Opinion
No. 74-005 No. 74-102
Decided December 10, 1974. Rehearing denied December 31, 1974. Certiorari granted on both 74-005 and 74-102 March 3, 1975.
In consolidation of two appeals determinative issue presented was whether subdivision regulation statute empowered court to set aside conveyance of land at the request of board of county commissioners.
Affirmed
1. LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATION — County Commissioners — No Power — Set Aside Conveyance — Statute. Subdivision regulation statute confers no power on a court to set aside a conveyance of land at the request of a board of county commissioners.
Appeal from the District Court of Lake County, Honorable Charles R. Casey, Judge.
No appearance for plaintiffs-appellees Donald A. and Jeanne A. Hinton.
Gaunt, Dirrim Coover, Lysle R. Dirrim, for defendants-appellees Joe Bobbitt, A. N. Bobbitt, Leslie Burroughs, and James Erger.
No appearance for defendant-appellee Lake Fork Development Company.
John W. Dunn, County Attorney for applicant-appellant and plaintiff-appellant Board of County Commissioners of the County of Lake, State of Colorado.
We have consolidated two cases in this appeal because resolution of one issue disposes of both. We affirm the trial court in each case.
Prior to August of 1972, Lake Fork Development Company (Lake Fork) owned approximately 542 acres of land, together with certain water rights in Lake County. In August of 1972, Lake Fork entered into a written contract agreeing to convey 16.247 acres of this land to Donald A. and Jeannie A. Hinton, together with a portion of the water rights. The acreage retained by Lake Fork is referred to in this opinion as tract A and the parcel which Lake Fork contracted to convey to Hintons is referred to as tract B.
On March 7, 1973, Hintons commenced civil action no. 8093 (appeal no. 74-005) against Lake Fork for specific performance of the contract. While the suit was pending, Lake Fork conveyed both tracts A and B to Joe and A. N. Bobbitt, and Bobbitts then conveyed tract A to Leslie W. Burroughs, Trustee, and tract B to James Erger on the same date. The trial court granted Hintons' request to add Bobbitts and Erger as defendants. The court thereafter entered a decree of specific performance requiring Erger to convey tract B to Hintons upon payment of the balance of the purchase price. The Board of County Commissioners of Lake County then moved to intervene on the basis that the Board claimed an interest in tract B by virtue of Colo. Sess. Laws 1972, ch. 81, 106-2-9(4)(a), relating to subdivision of land. This motion was accompanied by a motion for new trial. The trial court denied the motion to intervene.
In a separate action, the Board of County Commissioners initiated civil action no 8158 (appeal no. 74-102), naming as defendants Bobbitts, Burroughs, and Erger. The complaint alleged, in effect, that the conveyance from Bobbitts to Burroughs of tract A and to Erger of tract B without prior approval by the Board of a subdivision plat, constituted a subdivision of land in violation of Colo. Sess. Laws 1972, ch. 81, 106-2-9(4)(a), and the Lake County Subdivision Regulations. Insofar as material here, the Board requested that the court set aside the deeds from Bobbitts to Burroughs and Erger. Bobbitts, Burroughs, and Erger joined in a motion for summary judgment, and the trial court granted their motion.
[1] The basis for the trial court's ruling in each case was that Colo. Sess. Laws 1972, ch. 81, 106-2-9(b), confers no power on a court to set aside a conveyance at the request of the Board. We agree for the reasons stated in Board of County Commissioners v. Pfeifer, 35 Colo. App. 89, 532 P.2d 666. Since the trial court had no power to set aside the conveyances from Bobbitts to Burroughs and Erger in appeal no. 74-102, the Board's application to intervene was properly denied in appeal no. 74-005. The judgments in each case are therefore affirmed.
JUDGE COYTE and JUDGE VAN CISE concur.