![]() 3 ¶ 10 The lender sold it to Julie Walker in 2009. Sculac sold it to third parties in 2007 he reacquired it later that year and a lender foreclosed it in 2008. ♩ The Sculacs lost the refuge to foreclosure in 2001, but they got it back in 2004. The lender sold the home and the parcel, and the buyers eventually sold it to the plaintiffs in 2010. They lost their home and the parcel again in 2006, the year that Mrs. The Sculacs reacquired the parcel and the home in 2003 after the property had passed through several hands. Lenders foreclosed the Sculacs home and the 36.5-acre parcel in 2000. ♨ The record reveals that, beginning in 2000, the Sculacs and their property went through cycles of foreclosure and reacquisition. The home is located about 1000 feet from the refuge. The Sculacs built their home on this parcel. ![]() This 36.5-acre parcel is directly south of, and shares a common boundary with, the refuge. And, in 1998, she recorded another deed that severed another 36.5-acre parcel from the original parcel. Sculac recorded a deed that severed the refuge from the original parcel. Sculac erected the perimeter fence enclosing the refuge, Mrs. 2 ♧ The refuge was once part of a 320-acre parcel of land that Mrs. It has some paid staff and also uses volunteers. It derives its income from visitors fees and private donations. ♦ The refuge obtained these animals as rescues from other animal sanctuaries around the country that have gone out of business. Many of these animals are threatened or endangered species. The refuge houses about 140 tigers, lions, and other exotic animals. In 1999, the Sculacs formed a Colorado nonprofit corporation Big Cats of Serenity Springs, Inc. It was established by Nicholas and Karen Sculac in the mid-1990s. The Property ♥ Serenity Springs Wildlife Center is a ten-acre wildlife refuge located in El Paso County. We also conclude that this remedy was within the trial court s discretion. ![]() ♤ We conclude that the court did not err in its analysis of plaintiffs trespass and encroachment claim. As a remedy, the trial court ordered ¢ plaintiffs to sell the 1.7 acres, which contained some of the structures and fences housing some of the exotic animals, to defendants for $5780 ¢ defendants to pay all fees and costs associated with this sale and 1 ¢ defendants to pay plaintiffs $1737 to assist them in applying for a waiver that would allow plaintiffs to employ their property for agricultural uses. ♣ The trial court determined that some of the refuge s animals and their keepers trespassed on 1.7 acres owned by plaintiffs, James M. The animals live in structures that are surrounded by fences. ![]() It is owned by defendants, Big Cats of Serenity Springs, Inc., d/b/a Serenity Springs Wildlife Center, and Jules Investment, Inc. ♢ This appeal involves a refuge that harbors exotic animals. But, under the unusual facts of this case, we conclude that such a remedy was proper. ♡ Can a court order a land owner to sell the land to another if the other s structures encroach on the land? We recognize that this remedy, which is called a forced sale, should be used sparingly in encroachment cases. Iverson, Greenwood Village, Colorado, for Plaintiffs-Appellants Gregory John Hock, P.C., Gregory John Hock, Colorado Springs, Colorado, for Defendants-Appellees *Sitting by assignment of the Chief Justice under provisions of Colo. JUDGMENT AFFIRMED Division VI Opinion by JUDGE BERNARD Fox and Márquez*, JJ., concur Announced OctoHamilton Faatz, PC, Clyde A. Jules Investment, Inc., and Big Cats of Serenity Springs, Inc., d/b/a Serenity Springs Wildlife Center, Defendants-Appellees. 13CA1364 El Paso County District Court No. COLORADO COURT OF APPEALS 2014 COA 136 Court of Appeals No.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |