Kentucky
Court of Appeals Upholds Obligation to
Resell Condominium at Less than Fair Market Value
In a recent decision, the
Kentucky Court of Appeals upheld a deed covenant for a condominium requiring
that it be resold to the development at less than its fair market value. Puckett
v. St. Andrews Place Retirement Community, Inc., 2012 WL 1072418 (Ky. App.
Mar. 30, 2012) (not to be published).
The condominium complex in
question is operated by St. Andrews Place Retirement Community, Inc., a
nonprofit corporation. Mary Puckett
purchased a condominium for $52,065 in 1993, living in it until she passed away
in 2008. The Master Deed for the
property provided that the developer would have a right to re-acquire the
property upon its transfer with the price determined on a sliding scale against
the original unit cost based upon the number of years of residence. For someone holding property in excess of ten
years, the repurchase would be at 75% of the original cost. After Ms. Puckett’s death, St. Andrews
notified her heirs that it would be buying the property back for $38,588, that
being 75% of the original acquisition price of $52,065. In turn, the heirs refused to sell at less
than fair market value and brought a declaratory judgment action seeking the
determination that the buyback provision was an unforceable restraint on
alienation. When summary judgment was
granted to St. Andrews, the heirs appealed.
The heirs’ position was based in
part on Man O War Restaurant, Inc. v.
Martin, 932 S.W.2d 366 (Ky. 1996), wherein the Kentucky Supreme Court
invalidated a buyback provision for corporate shares pursuant to which they
would be reacquired for the initial acquisition cost, holding that such
constituted either an unenforceable penalty or unreasonable liquidated
damages. Curiously absent from the
Court’s discussion is any recognition that the Man O War Restaurant has been legislatively overruled by the
Kentucky General Assembly. See,
e.g., Rutledge, The 2002 Amendments
to the Kentucky Business Corporation Act, 67 Bench & Bar 13 (May, 2003). The heirs relied as well upon Sebastian v. Floyd, 585 S.W.2d 381 (Ky.
1979), the Court there invalidating a forfeiture clause in an installment land
sales contract, it requiring a credit, at the judicial sale, for payments
already made by the purchaser.
Ultimately, the Court held that
the buyback would be enforced, it being reasonable in light of the complete
disclosure to Ms. Puckett and as well her ultimate heir and the objectives of
St. Andrews, namely to provide affordable housing facilities.
It remains to be seen whether a
similar provision in a non-charitably focused venture would be upheld.
No comments:
Post a Comment