[WSBARP] Statute of Limitations Question

[Eric Nelsen]

Ron--How about lack of privity as a defense? I doubt the contract ran with the land, so all of Party A's contract obligations ran to Developer One. When Developer One sold the property, the contract became impossible for Developer One to perform and terminated. Unless Party A agreed to a transfer/assignment of the contract to Developer Two?

Seems to me that maybe Party A even has or had a claim for breach against Developer One, depending on how tightly Party A and Developer One were tied together by contractual obligations to develop. (Not that that was where your question was headed.) But the flipside of lack of privity is, Party A can't force Developer Two to sell a parcel to Party A.

Sincerely,

Eric

Eric C. Nelsen
SAYRE LAW OFFICES, PLLC
1417 31st Ave South
Seattle WA  98144-3909
phone 206-625-0092
fax 206-625-9040

Please Note that We Have Moved. We have moved our Seattle office to Mount Baker Ridge (a small commercial community just above the I-90 tunnel). Our new address is 1417 31st Avenue South, Seattle WA 98144. All other contact information remains the same.

From: wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com [mailto:wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com] On Behalf Of Ron Housh
Sent: Friday, July 28, 2017 9:18 AM
To: 'WSBA Real Property Listserv'
Subject: Re: [WSBARP] Statute of Limitations Question

Interesting statute of limitations issue.

Party A buys Parcel A from Developer One in 2006.
Party A agrees to cooperate "to the greatest extent possible" [whatever that means] in seller's completion of a Rural Cluster Subdivision - a 32 Lot development.
Upon approval of the Plat then an additional Parcel will be available for Party A to purchase.
Party A further agrees to "adhere to the CCR's of the Plat to be established" and further agrees to "respect and acknowledge" [whatever that means] the open space and native growth protection area in the Plat.

Developer One never develops the property and eventually sells all of the properties - except Parcel A which is still owned by Party A -   to Developer Two.

Developer Two is now seeking Plat approval which incorporates Parcel A  into the plat and incorporates Parcel A into the CCR's and is asking Party A to sign off.

Party A says:  I do not want my Parcel A to be part of the development; I do not want it to be subject to the CCR's and it has been over 10 years since I had the Agreement with Developer One.

Are Developer Two's claims that Party A has duties under the 2006 Sale Agreement time barred?

Thanks,

Ron


I AM TYPICALLY IN THE SEATTLE OFFICE ON TUESDAY AND THURSDAY AND IN THE MOUNT VERNON OFFICE ON MONDAY, WEDNESDAY AND FRIDAY

Ronald G. Housh, P.S.
Attorney at Law

Seattle Office:
1420 Fifth Avenue, Suite 3000
Seattle, WA 98101-2393
Phone:   206-381-1341
Fax:        206-464-0461
Email:    ron at housh.org<mailto:ron at housh.org>

Mount Vernon Office:
21411 Bluejay Place
Mount Vernon, WA 98274
Phone:  206-235-2459
Email:   ron at housh.org<mailto:ron at housh.org>






-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20170728/18427950/attachment.html>