Bixby Ranch Co. v. United States

Decision of the U.S. Court of Federal Claims

more+
less-

Issue was who bore the risk of loss of funds held back in escrow to cure title defects at closing of a purchase of easements. Air Force purchased easements from Bixby Ranch governing development of land adjacent to Vandenberg Air Force Base. Before closing, Bixby Ranch discovered two clouds on its title. To avoid a lapse in appropriations at year end, Air Force proposed closing purchase, with a portion of the price held back in escrow to be used to clear title. Air Force offered to hold the funds in a non-interest bearing escrow account under government control, but Bixby insisted on an interest-bearing account and the holdback amount was deposited with an escrow agent. Purchase closed, and title to the easements passed to the Air Force. Escrow agent then embezzled the holdback amount and Air Force had to use separate funds to clear title. Bixby sought payment of the holdback amount plus interest, but the Contracting Officer instead ordered Bixby to pay $150,000 to the Air Force to compensate it for the money it had to spend to clear title. Bixby sued, and the government counterclaimed. Case turned on whether Bixby had the unconditional right to receive the funds at the time of the embezzlement. It argued that the agreement required it to clear both title defects before receiving any of the hold back amount, and since it did not have the absolute right to the funds, the Air Force bore the risk of loss. Air Force responded that title to the entire purchase price including the holdback amount passed to Bixby at closing, and that release of the holdback was a condition subsequent to passage of title to the escrowed funds. Court agreed with the Air Force that title to funds in a "set-aside" escrow passed with title to the property, and granted summary judgment. The court also held that the government's prosecution of escrow agent for theft of government property did not affect the analysis.

Mitchell J. Matorin personally handled this case.

LOADING PDF: If there are any problems, click here to download the file.

Reference Info:Decision | Federal, Federal Circuit, Claims Court | United States


DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Mitchell J. Matorin, Matorin Law Office, LLC | Attorney Advertising

Written by:

more+
less-

Matorin Law Office, LLC on:

JD Supra Readers' Choice 2016 Awards
Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:

Sign up to create your digest using LinkedIn*

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.

Already signed up? Log in here

*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.
×
Loading...
×
×