Loading...
Contract for deed between Hopkins & Clayton Miller ~: . , ...... .......r~- ..~-w. CITY OF HOPKINS . ,,~;;'~'..:!~ . . I. ,........:..;'.r.:.'..f..-..:::~, ~ ..~ ~.~:"'::::~ I 1 01 0 FIRST STREET SOUTH · HOPKINS, MINNESOTA 55343 · 612/935-8474 MEMO Date: August 24, 1984 To: W1ll1am Cra1g C1ty Manager From: Jerre M1ller . The enclosed packet 1S self-explanatory. Clayton M1ller has a d1ff1cult land registration proceeding and wants the Counc1l to approve an extens10n for payment~ the Contract for Deed. This packet should then be admitted t~,~he)Counc1l for their approval. I //)q I'I---~., - " / / , / \...../ /II.lle.r> Ii 0:1 111'{,/vd-f/ #:. I~ l.e/,s I cJ 1/1 +,,~ !<.c ....... '-'Ad +k-l AAl -e.~ 4.J/;.. lit -rl"'tn' to IS ILf{JI'OVQ.J 61 fi~ a~Mc. t' I J f f.h1f~;J &V~ ') L-~l / / / t, LARKIN, HOFF?vIAN, DALY & LINDGREN, LTD ATTORN EYS AT LAW MINNEAPOLIS MINNESOTA 55402 SUITE 1110 PETER II( Bce... ..)ON 5 SWIERZ[:w5KI MICHAEL S fro4ARGULIES THOMAS J "LYNN RODERICK L MACKENZIE: JAMES P OUtNN ROBERT G RENNER DANIEL A. QUINLAN JEROME H MAHNKE TODD I FREEMAN CATHY' E GORLIN ANDREW J MITCHELL MICHEL.E P ....cGEE DAVID G MOELLER JOHN A COTTER- KATHLEEN MOATES. THOMAS G ......cOONALO.. BRADLEY H LEHRM....N BE:....TRICE.... ROTHWEILER SHERRILL 0.......1'4 KURETICH PAUL B PLUNKETT SUS....N R BURNIGHT SUS....N E B....RNES .......y O"RR GR....Oy AL....N L KILDOW NAO"" ... WILLIA",SON GARTH C COLLER.. JAh4ESP LARKIN ~OBERT L HOF'"F"'AN JACto( F DALY o KENNETH LINDGREN ANORE:W W O....NIELSON WE:NOE:LL R ANDERSON GCRA.LD H FFUEOELL ROBE:AT B WHITLOCK ALLA"" ( ""'ULLlO....N AOBE:ATJ HENNESSEY RONALD R FLeTCHER JAh4ES C ERICKSON COWARD J DRISCOLL JAMES P ....ILCY JOHN A ""CHUGH ca:NE N F'ULLER JOSEPH W ANTHONY DAVID C SELLERGRE"" JOHN 0 FULLMER ROaE:RT E BOYLE FRANK I HARVEY RICHARD A FOR-SCHLER RICHARD A NORDBYE ROBERT T MONT....GUE JR CH....RLCS S ,,",ODELL CHRISTOPHER J DIETZEN RICH....RD I OI....""'OND JOHN R BE....TTlE J....MES M STROTHER LINDA H FISHER THOM....S P STOLT.......N STEVEN G LEVIN FORREST 0. NOWLIN ....CH....EL C JACKMAN STEPHEN B SOLOMON JOHN E DIEHL EMBER 0 REICHGOTT 1500 NORTHWESTERN FINANCIAL CENTER 7900 XERXES AVENUE SOUTH MINNEAPOLIS MINNESOTA 55431 TELEPHONE 16121 635-3600 TELECOPIER NO 16121635-5102 1700 F'lRST BANK PLACE WEST FEDERAL PRACTICE PARTNERSHIP 120 SOUTH SIXTH STREET LARKIN MCCARTHY NOEL F"ALK & MINSHALL TELEPHONE f61Z1 338-6610 1301 PENNSYLVANIA N W WASHINGTON 0 C 20004 TELEPHONE 12021 737-1000 OF" COUNSEL JOSEPH GITIS "AL!lO ADMITTED IN WISCON!lIN ..~RESENTLY AOMITTItO ONLY IN "LORIOA August 17, 1984 . Jerre M111er, Esq. VESELY & MILLER Suite 400 Northwestern Bank Build1ng Hopk1ns, Mlnnesota 55343 Re: Contract for Deed between the City of Hopkins (vendor) and Clayton Miller, et al (vendee) Our File No. l2136-02 Dear Jerre: You w111 find enclosed a copy of the Report of Exam1ner which we obtained late Fr1day afternoon. You will note that the Report requires that we name the City of Minnetonka, the State of Minnesota, and Theodore M. Lob1tz (a holder of an old mortgage) as defendants. Also named is an entity called 7300 Associates. That pending litigation is now being settled by Clayton Miller, and he advises that he should be able to ob- tain a satisfaction in the next week or two. We are in the process of obtaining the Memorandum Abstracts regarding the property immediately north and immediately south of the land being reg1stered. I believe that the "spur" immediately to the south of the land belongs to the City of Hopkins, so that no title problems should arise because of that strip of land. Because it has taken such a great length of time to obtain the Examiner's Report, Clayton and the other vendees have asked me to propose an amend- ment of the Contract for Deed extending the payment date for one year. I believe this will be enough time to allow com?letion of the registration of t1tle so that the City of Hopkins can convey a warranty deed. L.AHKI~, HOFF~IAX. D.\.LY & LIKJ)CrREX, LTn Jerre M111er, Esq. August 17, 1984 Page Two I have attached a br1ef Amendment of Contract for Deed for your reV1ew. If 1t 1S acceptable to you, would you please let me know what approval process 1S requ1red by the C1ty of Hopklns for such an amendment, and proceed as qUlckly as posslble to obtain the necessary approvals. Please glve me a call if you have any quest1ons. 5'21Y' Susan R. Burn Larkln/ Hoff Llndgren, Ltd. nm ~ cc: Clayton Miller No. 19143 STATE OF MINNESOTA DISTRICT COURT COUNTY OF HENNEPIN FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT App. Doc. No. 4874937 s! 26-117-22 In the Matter of the Application of ) ) THE CITY OF HOPKINS, a Mmnesota ) municipal corporation, ) ) To Register the Title to Certain Land ) REPORT OF EXAMINER TO THE HONORABLE JUDGES OF THE DISTRICT COURT OF HENNEPIN COUNTY: . Pursuant to an Order heretofore entered in the above-entitled cause whereby said case was referred to the undersigned Examiner of Titles to examine into the title of the Applicant in and to the land described 10 the Application, and into the truth of all matters set forth therein, and particularly whether or not the land is occupied, and, if occupied, the nature thereof, and by what right the occupation is held, and also whether or not any judgments against Applicant or those through whom Applicant claims title, exist, Which may be a lien upon the land described in the Application, and to search all public records, and fully investigate all facts pertaining to the title which have been brought to my notice; and to make report in writing to the Court of the substance of the proof and file a report thereon, including a Certificate of opinion upon the title; I, said Examiner of Titles, after also having had said land inspected by the County Surveyor and having _ examined the records indicated on all the abstracts filed herein, do now report as follows: 1. That at the time of the filing of the Application herein, the said Applicant, THE CITY OF HOPKINS, a Minnesota municipal corporation, was the record owner in fee SImple of the certain lands in the County of Hennepin and State of Minnesota described in said Application and as follows: A tract of land comprising Lots 1 through 10, Block 1, Lots 1 through 7, Block 2, Lots 1 through 7, Block 3, all in SHADY OAK ADDITION; the accretions accruing to said ADDITION; all of vacated Circle Place and the vacated Town Road, dedicated in SHADY OAK ADDITION; a part of Government Lot 2, Section 26, Township 117, Range 22, and the accretions accruing thereto; all described as follows: Beginning at the most Westerly corner of Block 1, SHADY OAK ADDITION; thence Southeasterly along the South- westerly line of said ADDITION to the most Southerly corner of Block 2, in said ADDITION; thence Easterly along the Northerly line of the abandoned right-of-way of the Chicago, Milwaukee &. St. ~~u1 Railway Company to the shore lIne of Shady Oak Lake: thence Northwesterly, Northerly, Northeasterly and Northerly along saId shore line to its intersectIOn with the Nort1easterly extension of the Northwesterly line of saId Bloc, 1; thence Southwesterly along said extension and along the Northwesterly lIne of said Block 1 to the point of begInm:ig; EXCEPT that part of Government Lot 2 lying Easterly of a line described as beginning at a point where the Easterly line of the Town Road In SHADY OAK ADDITIO~ mtersects the West shore of Shady Oak Lake, which pom: is 911 feet South and 344 feet East of the Southwest co:-ner of Government Lot 3; thence South 34 degrees, 50 mm.ltes, 30 seconds West 257.3 feet along the Easterly line of ~Id Town Road to a point on the Northwesterly shore line of Shady Oak Lake, all in Section 26, Township 117, Range 22. 2. The Inspection Report of the County Surveyor on rile herein states that the WIthin land is vacant. However, at Paragraph -F" of the ApplicatIon the applicant alleges . that the Within land is occupied by Bruce A. Kociemba, Phil R. Sandm and Clayton L. Miller as contract purchasers pursuant to an u'lrecorded Contract for Deed with The CIty of Hopkins as vendor, dated October 21, 1983. . In lIne with the admission of the Ap~:.rcation, the Decree of Registration should contain the following concluding statement: o. To an unrecorded Contract f~r Deed in favor of Bruce A. Kociemba, Phil R. Sandin and Cl~~ ton L. Miller. Since the vendees have endorsed consent tJ this proceeding upon the Application, they need not be made defendants herein. 3. That the mortgage on said land is: At Paragraph "G" of the Application :he applicant alleges that Theodore M. Lobitz may have an interest in the land being repstered because of the mortgage in his favor which appears at entry 70 of the abstract. This mortgage was dated and recorded in 1952; also, it does not contain a maturity date. Therefore, it is your Examiner1s opinion that this mortgage has been barred by Minn~.sota Statutes Section 541.03. Nevertheless, I recommend said Theodore M. Lobitz as a jefendant so that there may be evidence at the .i:J hearing to support a finding in the Decree whether he has a lien upon any part of the land being registered in this proceeding. - 2- , 4. I note the following encumbrances, defects and Irregularities: (a) The applicant's attorney has informed your Examiner that all of the within land, some already registered land and some additional abstract land in Government Lot 1, SectIOn 26, Township 117, Range 22, has been included In the proposed plat of SHADY OAK SHORES. If the within land is replatted prior to registration, the legal description rJl/1 of the within land must be revised to describe it as part of the plat of SHADY OAK SHORES. This Information IS included for the purpose of completeness. (b) At entry 76 of the abstract there appears a Warranty Deed dated January 29, 1954, recorded February 6, 1954, in Book 1989 of Deeds, Page 319, which conveys Lots 4 and 5, Block 3, SHADY OAK ADDITION, to applicant's predecessors in title. This deed imposed certain restrictions as alleged in Paragraph "G" of the Application herein. The Decree of Registration should therefore contain the following concluding statement in the OK. . . "subject clause": ~' To the restrictions, other than racial restrictIOns, contained in Book 1989 of Deeds, Page 319, Document No. 2859040, as to Lots 4 and 5, Block 3, SHADY OAK ADDITION. ," (c) At entry 123 of the abstract there appears the record of a Final Certificate in a condemnation proceedmg brought by the City of Minnetonka in which the City acquired a permanent sanitary sewer easement over part of the within land. Accordingly, the Decree of Registration should contain the following concluding statement: (}/C ." To a permanent sanitary sewer easement in favor of the City of Minnetonka over the Westerly 25 feet of Lot 10, Block 1, and over the Westerly 25 feet of Lots 1 through 7, inclusive, Block 2, all in SHADY OAK ADDITION, as contained in Book 73 of Hennepin County Records, Page 4044466. At Paragraph "E" of the Application applicant alleges the existence of temporary easements for construction purposes in favor of the City of Minnetonka created by Condemnation No. 1075 shown at abstract entry 123. An examination of the condemna- ate tion Final Certificate shows that said temporary easements expired December 31, 1972. I recommend the City of Minnetonka as a defendant. y (d) The Decree of Registration should contain the following concluding statements relative to the water main easement shown at abstract entries 141, 142 and 143, namely: -3- To a water mam easement m favor of the City of Minnetonka over the Northwesterly 25 feet of Lots 1 through 9, inclusive, Block 1, SHADY OAK ADDITION, as contained m Hennepin County Recorder Document No. 4546211. To a water main easement in favor of the City of Minnetonka over the Northwesterly 25 feet and the Southwesterly 25 of Lot 10, Block 1, SHADY OAK ADDITION, as con tamed m Hennepm County Recorder Document No. 4546212. To a water mam easement in favor of the City of Minnetonka over the Southwesterly 25 feet of Lots 1 through 7, inclUSive, Block 2, SHADY OAK ADDITION, as contained in Hennepin County Recorder Document No. 4546214. . At Paragraph "E" of the Application applIcant alleges the eXistence of temporary easements for construction purposes in favor of the City of Minnetonka created in the above-{lescribed deeds shown at abstract entries 141, 142 and 143. An examination of the actual deeds shows that the deeds each included a provision that the temporary easements expired July 31, 1980. I recommend again as a defendant herein the City of Mmnetonka. (e) At Paragraph "E" of the Application applicant alleges that the State of Minnesota Department of Natural Resources has a possible right to regulate use of a portion of the land formerly covered by Shady Oak Lake. Your Examiner understands that applicant, in this allegation, is referring to the possible accretions or relictions indicated by the additional land shown on the proposed plat of SHADY OAK SHORES as compared to the old plat of SHADY OAK ADDITION. This additional land lies between the present lake shore as shown on said proposed plat and the "Town Road" as dedicated in the plat of SHADY OAK ADDITION. I therefore recommend the State of Minnesota as a defendant j) herein, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 508.15, so that there may be evidence at the hearing and a finding in the Decree as to whether it has an interest in any portion of the within land. It also appears that there may be additional land which may constitute accretions or relictions in those areas where the Northerly and Southerly lines of the within land intersect the shore line of Shady Oak Lake as shown on said proposed plat. It is possible that the owners and encumbrancers of the lands along the shore of Shady Oak Lake which adjoin the within land on the North and South may claim some rights in the accretions sought to be registered by the applicant herein. Therefore, the applicant's attorney should -4- . secure and file herem a Memorandum Abstract of the owners and encumbrancers of the land adjoining the within land on the North, P.I.D. No. 26-117-22-31-0001, and the land adjoIning the within land on the South, P.I.D. No. 26-117-22-34-0017. When this has been done, It should be brought to your Examiner's attentIOn so that the necessary additIonal defendants may be recommended by Supplemental Report. (f) The applicant, at Paragraph "I" of the ApplIcatIOn, alleges as a defect in its title the NotIces of Lis Pendens regarding condemnation of land for park purposes by the City of Hopkms, recorded February 18, 1955, as Document No. 2927416 and February 21, 1955, as Document No. 2927565. Because the applicant flIed said notices and further, because Mmnesota Statutes Section 557.021 provides that a Lis Pendens ceases to have effect after It has been of record for 10 years, these Notices of Lis Pendens do not constitute title defects. Your Examiner does note that the applIcant did acquire Lot 1, Block ~, herein by this condemnation proceedmg as shown by Certificate of Completion recorded in Book 2059 of Deeds, Page 504, entry 118. (g) The Judgment, Bankruptcy and Federal Tax Lien Search Certificate dated May 3, 1984, shows the following judgment upon the dockets of this Court: 7300 Associates vs. Clayton L. Miller, Case No. 796155, dated February 14, 1984, docketed February 14, 1984, in the amount of $5,330.89. Said Clayton L. Miller mayor may not be the same person as Clayton L. Miller who is presently an unrecorded Contract for Deed vendee. So that there may be evidence at the hearing to support a finding in the Decree whether this Judgment constitutes a lien upon the interest of said vendee in the land to be registered, I recommend as a defendant the judgment creditor, 7300 Associates. (h) The Inspection Report of the County Surveyor on file herein states that Dominick Drive as laid out and traveled encroaches across the Northwesterly portion of the within land. The County Surveyor has further indicated to your Examiner that said Drive is blacktopped and appears to be open for public travel. I assume there will be evidence at the hearing as to whether or not this blacktopped Drive has been opened for public travel. If the evidence discloses that this blacktop drive has been opened for public travel, no mention need be made in the Decree of Registration of an easement for road purposes because M.S.A. Section 508.25 specifically subjects registered land to all rights in public highways. So that this matter can be properly adjudicated, I hereby again recommend as a defendant the City of Minnetonka. -5- JJ oK o V {rlJJ I . (I) Abstract entry 147 shows that 1983 taxes have been paid and that the within land 1S exempt from 1984 taxes. Th1S matter is mentioned for purposes of completeness. 5. That the part1es defendant in sa1d cause should be: . Theodore M. Lobltz C1ty of Mmnetonka State of Minnesota (See Par. 4 (e) as to Memorandum Abstract and Supplemental Report) 7300 ASSoc1ates "also all heirs and devisees of any of the above-named persons who are deceased; and all other persons or parties unknown claiming any right, title, estate, lien or mterest in the real e~tate described in the Application or amendments herein." 6. That the market value of the land exclusive of improvements is $262,000.00. 7. That all the material allegations contained in the said Application are substan- t1ally true, as herein stated, except as heremabove found and that applIcant is entitled to the relief prayed for upon correcting the irregularitles and defects above named. Respectfully submitted this 10th day of August, 1984. RICHARD W. EDBLOM, Examiner of Titles MJB/ By B -6- -:"':1- 'l'" ~...~' ._ t He 40Z8 MEMORANDUM TO ATTORNEY,. If your investigation reveals that a recommended defendant is deceased, you should not name that party as a defendant. Instead you should ascertain whether his estate has been probated in Hennepin County or in any other county in Minnesota where you have reason to believe the defendant resided. You then should substitute as defend- ants his heirs or devisees as determined by the Probate Court Decree. If a defendant is deceased but his heirs have not been deter- mined in Minnesota, you should substitute as defendants "The Unknown Heirs of , deceased" together with his likely known heirs whose names you can ascertain. The Decree of Registration should then contain a finding explain- ing why the party recommended as defendant was not named and why other parties were substituted for him. AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT fOR DEED e BY AND BETWECN CITY or HOPKINS, VCNDOR AND BRUCE A. KOCIEMBA, PHIL R. SANDIN and CLAYTON L. MILLER, VCNDEES Th~s Amendment is made th~s day of , 1934, by and between The C~ty of Hopk~ns, a mun~c~pal corporat~on (the Vendor) and 3ruce A. Kociemba, Ph~l R. Sand~n, and Clayton L. M~ller (Vendees). The part~es hereto, 1n cons1derat~on of the sum of One Dollar ($1.00) and other good and valuable cons1derat10n, the receipt of Wh1Ch 1S hereby acknowledged, hereby amend that certa~n Contract for Deed dated October 21, 1983, between Vendor and Vendees, where~n the Vendor agreed to convey to Vendees the following real property: All of Blocks 1, 2 and 3, Shady Oak Addition, INCLUDING that part of Dom1nick Dr1ve and C1rcle Place with1n said add1tion, vacated or to be vacated, INCLUDING that part of Government Lots 1 and 2, of Section 26, Township 117, Range 22 lY1ng Southerly of the South 11ne of the right of way of the Minneapol1s and St. Louis Ra11way, lY1ng Northerly of the North line of Lot 1, Block 3, said Shady Oak Add1tion, and Easterly of the East line of Dominick Drive as shown 1n the plat of sa1d addit10n. " - ALSO That part of Government Lot 2, lying Easterly of a line described as beglnning at a p01nt where the Easterly line of the Town Road 1n Shady Oak Addition intersects the West shore of Shady Oak Lake, Wh1Ch point 1S 9ll feet South and 344 feet East of the Southwest corner of Government Lot 3; thence South 34 degrees, 50 minutes, 30 seconds West 257 and 3/10 feet along the Easterly line of said Town Road to a point on the Northwesterly shore line of Shady Oak Lake, all in Section 26, Township 117, Range 22. All in Hennepin County, Minnesota. 10 the following manner: 1. The unpaid principal balance of the Contract shall be due and payable in full on October 21, 1985. 2. Upon completion of Registration Proceeding No. 19143 regarding the above-referenced property, the legal descript10n contained in the Order entered in said proceedings shall be subst1tuted for the legal descrlption set forth in the Contract. IN WITNESS \-lHCREOF, the part~es hereto have executed th~s Amendment thlS day of , 1984. . VENDOR: THE CITY OF HOPKINS By: Its: VENDEES: Bruce A. Koclemba Phll R. Sandin Clayton L. Mlller ,- STATE OF MINNESOTA) )ss. COUNTY OF ) The foregolng instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 1984 by the of The Clty of Hopkins, a municipal corporation, on behalf of the corporation. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA) )ss. COUNTY OF ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this of , 1984 by Bruce A. Kociemba. day Notary Public . STATe OF MINNESOTA) ) 55. COUNTY OF ) The foregolng lnstrument was acknowledged before me thlS day of , 1984 by Phll R. Sandln. Notary PubllC STATE OF MINNESOTA) ~ ) ss. COUNTY OF ) The foregolng instrument was acknowledged before me thlS of , 1984 by Clayton L. Mlller. day Notary PubllC -)-