arrow left
arrow right
  • Wong-Sing, Doris et. al. vs. Kai, C. K. et. al.Civil-Roseville document preview
  • Wong-Sing, Doris et. al. vs. Kai, C. K. et. al.Civil-Roseville document preview
  • Wong-Sing, Doris et. al. vs. Kai, C. K. et. al.Civil-Roseville document preview
  • Wong-Sing, Doris et. al. vs. Kai, C. K. et. al.Civil-Roseville document preview
  • Wong-Sing, Doris et. al. vs. Kai, C. K. et. al.Civil-Roseville document preview
  • Wong-Sing, Doris et. al. vs. Kai, C. K. et. al.Civil-Roseville document preview
  • Wong-Sing, Doris et. al. vs. Kai, C. K. et. al.Civil-Roseville document preview
  • Wong-Sing, Doris et. al. vs. Kai, C. K. et. al.Civil-Roseville document preview
						
                                

Preview

1 KEVIN SINGER SUPERIOR COURT REFEREE 10/23/2020 2 RECEIVERSHIP SPECIALISTS 980 9th Street, 16th Floor 3 Sacramento, California 95814 Telephone: (916) 449-9655 4 Facsimile: (916) 446-7104 E-mail: Kevin@ReceivershipSpecialists.com 5 Property APNs: 6 026-090-012, 026-100-019, 026-100-021 7 8 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 9 COUNTY OF PLACER 10 DORIS YIN MEI WONG-SING, GODFREY ) Case No.: SCV0039754 11 LEUNG, CONSUELO TYCANGCO TSE, ) as Trustee of the Tse Family Trust dated ) SUPERIOR COURT REFEREE’S 12 May 18, 2000 and PRISCILLA ) REPORT FOR SEPTEMBER 2020 AND TYCANGCO ENRILE LAO, individually ) NOTICE OF INTENT TO PAY 13 and as Trustee of the Priscilla Tycangco ) REFEREE’S FEES AND EXPENSES Enrile Lao Trust U.D.T. dated November 28, ) 14 2005, ) Commissioner: Michael Jacques ) Dept.: 40 15 Plaintiffs, ) ) Court: Placer County Superior Court 16 v. ) 10820 Justice Center Drive ) Roseville, California 95678 17 FUNG MAN SHEUNG AMY, KAI FUNG ) MAN and KAI PUI MAN JUDITH as the ) 18 heirs of C. K. KAI, also known as KAI ) CHUEN KAM, deceased, and all persons ) 19 unknown claiming an interest in the property ) named as Does 1 - 10, inclusive, ) 20 ) Defendants. ) 21 ) 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Page 1 REFEREE’S REPORT 026 RECEIVERSHIP SPECIALISTS STATE AND U.S. FEDERAL COURT RECEIVERS/REFEREES/TRUSTEES Corporate Headquarters Los Angeles 11500 W. Olympic Blvd. Suite 530 SUPERIOR COURT REFEREE’S REPORT FOR SEPTEMBER 2020 AND Los Angeles, CA 90064 NOTICE OF INTENT TO PAY REFEREE’S FEES AND EXPENSES Tel:(310) 552-9064 Fax: (310) 552-9066 San Francisco 795 Folsom Street Presented By: Kevin Singer, Superior Court Referee 1st Floor San Francisco, CA 94107 Tel:(415) 848-2984 Fax: (415) 848-2301 San Diego 4660 La Jolla Village Drive Suite 100 San Diego, CA 92122 Tel:(858) 546-4815 DORIS YIN MEI WONG-SING, ET AL. Fax: (858) 646-3097 Plaintiffs Ventura/Santa Barbara 1500 Palma Drive 2nd Floor v. Ventura, CA 93003 Tel:(805) 267-1283 Fax: (805) 654-0080 FUNG MAN SHEUNG AMY, ET AL. Sacramento Defendants 980 9th Street 16th Floor Sacramento, CA 95814 Tel:(916) 449-9655 Fax: (916) 446-7104 Las Vegas 7251 W. Lake Mead Blvd. Suite 300 Las Vegas, NV 89128 Placer County Superior Court Case No. SCV0039754 Tel:(702) 562-4230 Fax: (702) 562-4001 Superior Court Commissioner: Hon. Michael C. Jacques Reno 200 S. Virginia Street Suite 800 Reno, NV 89501 Tel:(775) 398-3103 Fax: (775) 686-2401 Real Property APNs: Phoenix 026-090-012, 026-100-019, 026-100-021 2 N. Central Avenue Suite 1800 Phoenix, AZ 85004 Page 2 Tel:(602) 343-1889 Fax: (602) 343-1801 ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ REFEREE’S REPORT 026 October 23, 2020 Dear Vested Parties: On September 10, 2018, the Court, the Honorable Michael C. Jacques presiding entered an Interlocutory Judgment Granting Partition by Sale and Appointing Court Referee for Partition Sale of Real Property (the “Appointing Order”). Pursuant to the Appointing Order, I, Kevin Singer, was appointed as referee (“Referee”) pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure Section 873.010 to manage and partition by sale the undeveloped parcels of land located in Placer County, commonly known as Assessor’s Parcels Nos. 026-090- 012 (“Parcel 012”), 026-100-019 (“Parcel 019”), and 026-100-021 (“Parcel 021”), and legally defined as: The land described herein is situated in the State of California, County of Placer, unincorporated area, described as follows: Parcel One: That portion of Section 15, Township 13 North, Range 7 East, M.D.M., included within the land shown and designated as Parcel C and Parcel D on Parcel Map No. P72994, filed for record in the office of the Placer County Recorder on July 15, 1980 in Book 16 of Parcel Maps at Page 137, Placer County Records. Excepting therefrom all oil, gas and other hydrocarbons and minerals as reserved by Capital Company, a corporation, et al, in the deed dated March 26, 1942 and recorded July 9, 1942 in Book 427, Official Records, Page 269. Parcel Two: A non-exclusive easement for roadway, drainage and public utility purposes over, under and across the land shown and designated as Areas “J” and “K” of Parcel Map No. P72994, filed for record in the office of the Placer County Recorder on July 15, 1980 in Book 16 of Parcel Maps at Page 137, Placer County Records. Excepting therefrom all that portion thereof lying within Parcel One described herein. /// /// /// Page 3 ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ REFEREE’S REPORT 026 Parcel Three: A non-exclusive easement for roadway, drainage and public utility purposes over, under and across the land shown and designated as Area “J” of Waiver of Parcel Map No. 72408 W, recorded in the office of the Placer County Recorder on February 23, 1978 in Book 1944, Official Records, Page 161. Excepting therefrom that portion thereof lying within Parcel One described herein. APN: 026-090-012,·026-100-019 (Parcel C) 026-090-021 (Parcel D) (collectively, the “Property”). Parcel 012, Parcel 019, and Parcel 021 are referred to herein individually as a “Parcel” and collectively as the “Parcels.” According to the Appointing Order, there are no liens or encumbrances on the Property appearing of record or otherwise known to the Parties (defined below) or apparent from an inspection of the Property and the Property is owned by plaintiffs and defendants as tenants in common. More specifically, ownership of the Property is as follows: ▪ Plaintiff Doris Yin Mei Wong-Sing (“Wong-Sing”) is the owner of an undivided 7.8125% interest in the Property; ▪ Plaintiff Godfrey Leung (“Leung”) is the owner of an undivided 7.8125% interest in the Property; ▪ Plaintiff Consuelo Tycangco Tse, as Trustee of the Tse Family Trust dated May 18, 2000 (“Tse Trust”), is the owner of an undivided 25% interest in the Property; ▪ Plaintiff Priscilla Tycangco Enrile Lao, as Trustee of the Priscilla Tycangco Enrile Lao Trust U.D.T. dated November 28, 2005, (“Lao Trust”) is the owner of an undivided 21.875% interest in the Property; ▪ Plaintiff Priscilla Tycangco Enrile Lao, as an individual, (“Lao”) is the owner of an undivided 21.87 5% interest in the Property; and ▪ C. K. Kai, also known as Kai Chuen Kam, having been the owner of an undivided 15.625% interest in the Property and having died on August 12, 2014, leaving as heirs surviving him, his widow, defendant Fung Man Sheung Amy (“Amy”) and two adult children, defendant Kai Fung Man (“Man”) and defendant Kai Pui Page 4 ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ REFEREE’S REPORT 026 Man Judith (“Judith”), are now the owners of an undivided 15.625% interest in the Property. Owner Interest Wong-Sing 7.8125 % Leung 7.8125 % Tse Trust 25.0000 % Lao Trust 21.8750 % Lao 21.8750 % Amy, Man & Judith 15.6250 % Total 100.0000 %f Plaintiffs Wong-Sing, Leung, Tse Trust, Lao Trust, and Lao are referred to herein individually as a “Plaintiff” and collectively as “Plaintiffs.” Defendants Amy, Man, and Judith are referred to herein individually as a “Defendant” and collectively as “Defendants.” Defaults have been entered against all Defendants. Plaintiffs and Defendants are referred to herein individually as a “Party” and collectively as the “Parties.” The following summarizes what has transpired since I assumed my role as Referee in this matter through the end of September 2020: September 2018 Activity: ➢ 9/14/2018 In preparation for the eventual sale of the Property, I researched and obtained Property Detail Reports (the “Detail Reports”) from First American Title Company (“First American”) for each of the Parcels. In general, the Detail Reports provide various information, including but not limited to, ownership information, location information, last transfer/conveyance – current owner information, last market sale information, prior sale information, property characteristics, site information, tax information, sales comparables, a foreclosure report, an assessor’s map, and related deeds. ➢ 9/18/2018 Pursuant to the Appointing Order, I posted my bond and filed and served my Oath of Referee. ➢ 9/18/2018 We logged into the Placer County Treasurer/Tax Collector’s (“Placer County”) website and pulled the 2018– 2019 Placer County property tax bills for the each of the Parcels as well as copies of the respective Tax, Assessment Info, and Tax Code Info tabs from the Placer County website. First and second installments for the 2018–2019 Page 5 ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ REFEREE’S REPORT 026 taxes for each of the Parcels are due December 10, 2018, and April 10, 2019, respectively. ➢ 9/18/2018 We obtained a property map and surveyor’s map with boundaries for the Property so that itmay more easily be identified. ➢ 9/18/2018 Pursuant to Item 19 of the Appointing Order, I am to maintain adequate insurance over the Property. We were advised that there is no insurance on the Property. As the Property is undeveloped, we will have the Property added to our master insurance policy for liability coverage only. ➢ 9/18/2018 Phillip Maddux, Esq. (“Maddux”) of Reynolds Maddux Woodward LLP, counsel for Plaintiffs, advised us that he had requested Robert Floodman (“Floodman”), a realtor with Nick Sadek Sotheby’s International Realty, prepare an informal market analysis of the Property. According to Maddux, Floodman is a well-known Placer County realtor. ➢ 9/20/2018 We contacted Floodman and he forwarded us the Comparative Market Analysis Report (“CMA”) he prepared as of April 23, 2018. Floodman orally provided us a Broker’s Opinion of Value (“BOV”) for each of the Parcels. Floodman valued Parcel 012 and Parcel 019 at $250,000 each (more or less the equivalent of $12,500 per acre) and Parcel 021 at $350,000 (more or less the equivalent of $8,750 per acre). Following is a summary of the Parcels based upon the information provided by Floodman: APN Parcel 012 Parcel 019 Parcel 021 Square Footage 792,792 953,964 1,777,248 Acreage 18.2 21.9 40.8 Price per Acre $13,736 $11,415 $8,578 BOV $250,000 $250,000 $350,000 We anticipate engaging Floodman to list, market, and sell the Property. ➢ 9/20/2018 In order to make the Property marketable, Floodman and I believe we will have to guarantee a water well on each Parcel as a condition of sale. Currently, none of the Parcels have a water well on them. Consequently, we will obtain quotes, estimates, and conceptual locations for where the wells may be constructed. In addition, we will be Page 6 ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ REFEREE’S REPORT 026 contacting a land surveyor to evaluate identifying Property boundaries for each of the Parcels. This, too, should help improve the marketability of the Parcels. Once completed, I will prepare, file, and serve a report with recommending my proposed method of sale for the Property. ➢ 9/26/2018 I prepared a letter to Maddux (the “Introduction Letter”) together with a copy of the Appointing Order. In the Introduction Letter, I introduced myself, detailed the process by which I intend to market and partition by sale the Property, and explained the process by which proceeds from the sale of the Property will be distributed. October 2018 Activity: ➢ 10/30/2018 My Senior Project Manager for this matter, Richard Marquis (“Marquis”), visited the Property. Marquis met with two different well drilling companies, Diamond Well Drilling Co. (“Diamond”) and Gary C. Tanko Well Drilling, Inc. (“Tanko”), so that they could evaluate the terrain and prepare quotes to drill wells. While two of the Parcels (Parcel 012 and Parcel 019) fall under the water authority of the Nevada Irrigation District (the “NID”),1 there is currently no water available to be provided. We anticipate receiving written quotes in November 2018. While there, Marquis photographed the Property. ➢ Various We requested Andregg Psomas, a land surveying company, provide us pricing to have a surveyor mark boundaries for the Property. We anticipate receiving the quote in early November 2018. ➢ Late 10/2018 Andregg Psomas provided us additional photos of the land. ➢ 10/31/2018 Pursuant to Item 19 of the Appointing Order, I am to maintain adequate insurance over the Property. We were 1 The NID is a diversified water resource district that supplies both treated drinking water and irrigation water to nearly 25,000 homes, farms, and businesses in Nevada and Placer counties in the foothills of Northern California’s Sierra Nevada Mountains. The NID collects water from the mountain snowpack and stores it in an extensive system of ten reservoirs. As water flows to customers in the foothills, it is used to generate clean hydroelectric energy and to provide public recreational opportunities. The NID is an independent California special district governed by an elected board. Page 7 ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ REFEREE’S REPORT 026 advised that there is no insurance on the Property. As the Property is undeveloped, we have begun the process of having the Property added to my master insurance policy for liability coverage only. November 2018 Activity: ➢ 11/1/2018 We received a draft Well Drilling Agreement from Tanko breaking down the costs to drill wells at the Property. ➢ 11/8/2018 Pursuant to our request, Andregg Psomas (“Psomas”), a land surveying company we engaged, provided us a quote to have a surveyor mark boundaries for the Property. The markers would permit prospective buyers to visually observe the boundaries of the Parcels. ➢ 11/2018 We are scheduling a meeting with Floodman to visit the Property in December 2018 so that he may complete his BOV and establish a recommended listing price. ➢ 11/20/2018 Floodman provided us a title map from Placer Title Co. (“Placer Title”) depicting easements to, from, and across the Property for the benefit of both the Property and the adjacent properties as well as an easement over Parcel C to Parcel D. ➢ 11/20/2018 Floodman pulled a preliminary title report from Placer Title for Parcel C and provided it to us. ➢ 11/21/2018 Floodman subsequently pulled a preliminary title report from Placer Title for Parcel D and provided it to us. ➢ 11/21/2018 Upon review of the two preliminary title reports, we confirmed that while there are three APNs associated with the Property, there are only two legal parcels. ➢ 11/2018 In December 2018, we will be meeting with the one or both of the drillers to obtain prospective locations for the water wells. December 2018 Activity: ➢ 12/20/2018 Marquis conducted another site visit to the Property. While there, Marquis met with Floodman to assist him in his preparations of a revised BOV and establishing a listing price. We also made preliminary efforts to confirm the Page 8 ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ REFEREE’S REPORT 026 boundaries of the two parcels. Based upon this visit, our next step will be to return to Psomas in an effort to negotiate a lower price to identify the boundaries of the Property. Psomas previously estimated that the cost would approximate $7,000 (in prior reports, this figure was inadvertently stated as $5,000). We believe it will be extremely helpful to clearly define the boundaries of the Property to improve our marketing efforts given the irregular topography and size of the Property. Once that is completed, Floodman should be in a better position to arrive at a revised BOV. ➢ 12/28/2018 Pursuant to our request, Diamond delivered us a quote of $600 for geoimagery services that would provide us a marked up aerial photo and written recommendation as to where Diamond recommends drilling the water wells and the chances for success. The recommendation will include, among other things, a stereo pair analysis. It should be noted that Diamond’s recommendation as to where to drill and what the chances of success are should not be construed as a guarantee that water in the quantities or quality we desire will be found. The only way to know that for certain is to actually drill the wells. ➢ 12/28/2018 I requested Placer Title record certified copies of the Appointing Order on the title record to Parcel C (APNs 026-090-012 and 026-100-019) and Parcel D (APN 026- 100-021). January 2019 Activity: ➢ 1/8/2019 I directed Diamond to proceed with the geoimagery services. A deliverable is anticipated to be received in February 2019. ➢ 1/2019 We were unable to negotiate further with Psomas to reduce the estimate of $7,000 (in prior reports, this figure was inadvertently stated as $5,000) to determine the land boundaries of the Property. Therefore, Marquis reached out to the Parties to ask that they replenish the Referee account with $7,000 (in prior reports, this figure was inadvertently stated as $5,000) to cover the land survey. We anticipate that the Parties will advance the funds to hire Psomas in February 2019. /// Page 9 ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ REFEREE’S REPORT 026 February 2019 Activity: ➢ 2/13/2019 We directed Diamond to proceed with its geoimagery services. Diamond delivered to us its report and accompanying geoimages. Diamond reported his analysis as follows: A look at Figure 1, part of the Smartsville Plate of the California Bureau of Mines and Geology surface Geology map shows the position of the subject property (lower right hand corner) relative to the Auburn Shear Zone, which is a series of in-echelon faults and some transverse faults dating from the tectonic activity that played a key role in the Sierra orogeny. Since the area of this property is in what we drillers call hard rock geology anything that indicates activity that broke up the rock millions of years ago holds the possibility of holding water. This is what we drillers look for, cracks in the rock that we call “fractures.” These hold the possibility of storing water. A well that hits one of these is a good well, one that does not is a dry hole. In these hard rock environments there is no water table as such. In looking at stereo aerial photos we look for faults, fracture traces, and “slump structures” that hold the possibility of broken rock. We then look for recharge sources, basin areas with obvious capabilities of holding water in underlying formations, rivers, streams, or bodies of water that hold the possibility of feeding the fractures. A “slump structure” is an ancient landslide, a place where a hill or a mountain with the help of gravity or tectonic movement allowed part of its structure to slip and settle at a lower elevation. Such structures have a slippage plane where the formation on top of the plane is more fractured than that below it and, therefore, more likely to hold water. That is what our geologist has identified here and portrayed in the 3D photos. Unfortunately, the subject property is to the east of the shear zone and is not as likely to be “broken up” to the same Page 10 ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ REFEREE’S REPORT 026 extent as the formation under the land where the shear zone is. (Look at what the geologist identifies as the “fault zone” Figures 2 and 3.) This does not mean that there are not fractures influenced by the tectonic activity of the shear zone. Our geologist has identified a couple of slump structure “breaks” that cut across southwest/ northeast all three parcels. Looking at Figure 2 which views north and shows the western face of the three parcels, notice the orange lines. Here is what he is identifying as the zones that are most likely to be fractured as a result of the “slump.” These are actually two different slumps. The yellow lines are the approximate property lines. Figure 3 looks south and most clearly shows the slump structure activity. One can see the fault zone to the west (left in Figure 2). As a “recharge” sources our geologists identifies the irrigation ditch that circumscribes the property. Though supposedly sealed with gunnite, the ditches leak prodigiously and in doing so feed the fractures that they over lay. In putting forward these analyses, our geologist says that getting bountiful water on the parcels is unlikely. 1. The subject properties are outside the fault zone; and 2. The recharge source is not a plentiful one. Nevertheless, the geologist has set out the most propitious sites to drill on the three properties based on the “slump structure” strategy that I have described. As far as a drilling strategy is concerned the geologist recommends going to at least 350’ bgs. The ditch is approximately 250’ below the drill sites and one needs to at least get below that in order to play out the ditch recharge theory. Thereafter there is still a possibility of picking up water in echelon Page 11 ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ REFEREE’S REPORT 026 or transverse fault activity from the shear zone. To play this out one would have to go to 800’ or 900’. Here one would rely on what the driller would find as he drilled. We say “read the activity.” The geologist likes site #1 the best, the one on parcel 12. The break is obvious here. If this well is unsuccessful then the prospects for getting water on the other sites diminishes. This then should be the