Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.

Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw

Date: 10-04-2012

Case Style: Yorktown Holding, LLC v. Stephen P. Wallace

Case Number: CJ-2009-247

Judge: Rebecca B. Nightingale

Court: District Court, Tulsa County, Oklahoma

Plaintiff's Attorney: James Poe, Genter F. Drummond, Gary Michael Gaskins

Defendant's Attorney: Joan Godlove

Description: Yorktown Holding, LLC, W.H. Land Company, LLC and 2005 LRJ, LLC sued Stephen P. Wallace, Marty Roma Jage, Edith L. Jackson, Vilia T. Jage, Michael P. Jage and Joan Godlove on quite title theories.

Plaintiffs claimed:

Plaintiff, Yorktown Holding, received title to the Subject Property by Partnership/Trustee’s Deed filed October 20, 2006, at Doc. #2006121364 (Exhibit B), and by Trustees Deed filed October 20, 2006, at Doe. #200612 1365 (Exhibit C), all as recorded in the Office of the Tulsa County Clerk. (A true and correct copy of the referenced documents is attached and the Court may take judicial notice of them pursuant to 12 0.5. § 2202)

The Subject Property was conveyed to Yorktown Holding by the then Trustees of
The Lorice T Wallace Irrevocable Trust dated February 8, 1996, as General Partner of the
Lorice T. Wallace Family Limited Partnership, and the then Trustees of the Lorice T. Wallace
Revocable Trust. (See Exhibits B and C). (A true and correct copy of the referenced documents
is attached and the Court may take judicial notice of them pursuant to 12 U.S. § 2202)

Yorktown Holding subsequently conveyed a portion of the Subject Property to Plaintiff, W-H Land, by General Warranty Deed filed October 30, 2006, at Doc. #2006 124675 (Exhibit D); to Plaintiff, 2005-LRJ, by General Warranty Deed filed October 30, 2006, at Doc. #2006124676 (Exhibit E); and to Plaintiff, Yorktown Trading, by Warranty Deed filed January 22, 2007, at Doc. #2007007135 (Exhibit F), all as recorded in the Office of the Tulsa County Clerk. (A true and correct copy of the referenced documents is attached and the Court may take judicial notice of them pursuant to 12 0.5. § 2202)

Prior to conveying the Subject Property to Yorktown Holding, the then Trustees of The Lorice T. Wallace Irrevocable Trust dated February 8, 1996, as General Partner of the Lorice T. Wallace Family Limited Partnership, and the then Trustees of the Lorice T. Wallace Revocable Trust sought and secured an Order Granting Petitioners’ Motion For Approval Of Sale Purchase Agreements entered July 1, 2005, filed July 6, 2005, in Case No. PT-2002-56, in the District Court of Tulsa County, Oklahoma (Exhibit G). The PT-2002-56 Order granted the Trustees of said Trusts the authority to convey the Subject Property to Yorktown Holding, which said Order was expressly granted over the objection of Wallace and Mary Roma Jage. (14) (A true and correct copy of the referenced documents is attached and the Court may take judicial notice of them pursuant to 12 0.5. § 2202)

Also, prior to conveying the Subject Property to Yorktown Holding, the then Trustees of The Frank A. Wallace Revocable Trust sought and secured an Order For Sale Of Real Property entered July 5, 2005, filed July 7, 2005, in Case No. PT-2003-46, in the District Court of Tulsa County, Oklahoma. (Exhibit H). The PT-2003-46 Order granted the Trustees of said Trust the authority to convey the Subject Property to Yorktown Holding. (RI.) (A true and correct copy of the referenced documents is attached and the Court may take judicial notice of them pursuant to 12 OS. § 2202)

PRE-LITIGATJON LIS PENDENS CLAIMS

The Judgments entered in Tulsa County Case Nos. PT-2002-56 and PT-2003-46 (“State Court Judgments”) were appealed by Wallace; however, Mary Roma Jage, did not seek appellate review of the State Court Judgments, even though Mary Roma Jage participated in the actions leading up to the State Court Judgments. Both State Court Judgments were affirmed by the Court of Civil Appeals on December 22, 2006. (Exhibit I) (A true and correct copy of the referenced documents is attached and the Court may take judicial notice of them pursuant to 12
0.5. § 2202)

The Oklahoma Supreme Court issued a Mandate affirming the State Court Judgments on March 29, 2007. (Exhibit J) (A true and correct copy of the referenced documents is attached and the Court may take judicial notice of them pursuant to 12 O.S. § 2202)

Despite the clear and unambiguous State Court Judgments that were affirmed by the Oklahoma Supreme Court, Defendants subsequently filed the following frivolous Notices of Lis Pendens and corresponding civil actions in an apparent attempt to overturn the State Court Judgments granting Plaintiffs title to the Subject Property:

a. On May 9, 2006, Mary Roma Jage, Vilia T. Jage and Michael P. Jage filed
a Notice of Lis Pendens in the Office of the Tulsa County Clerk as Document No.
2006052478 (Exhibit K), which claims an interest in the Subject Property owned by
Plaintiffs and references proceedings before the U.S. District Court for the Northern
District of Oklahoma, Case No. 4:06-cv-249.

b. On December 29, 2006, Jackson filed a Notice of Lis Pendens in the Office of the Tulsa County Clerk as Document No. 2006147760 (Exhibit L), which claims an interest in the Subject Property owned by Plaintiffs and references proceedings before the U.S. District Court for the District of Nebraska, Case No. 4:06CV3214.’

c. On April 20, 2007, Jackson filed a Notice of Lis Pendens in the Office of the Tulsa County Clerk as Document No. 2007042285 (Exhibit M), which claims an interest in the Subject Property owned by Plaintiffs and references proceedings before the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Case No. 4:07CV2 11.2

d. On September 7, 2007, Jackson filed a Notice of Lis Pendens in the Office of the Tulsa County Clerk as Document No. 2007101046 (Exhibit N), which claims an interest in the Subject Property owned by Plaintiffs and references proceedings before the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Case No. 4:07CV229.

e. On November 10, 2008, Wallace filed a Notice of Lis Pendens in the Office of the Tulsa County Clerk as Document No. 2008114890 (Exhibit 0), which claims an interest in the Subject Property owned by Plaintiffs and references proceedings before the Corporation Commission of the State of Oklahoma, Cause PD No. 200800542. (A true and correct copy of the referenced documents is attached and the Court may take judicial notice of them pursuant to 12 0.S. § 2202)

On or about December 23, 2008, the Hon. Daman Cantrell entered an Order Cancelling, Releasing and Discharging Notice of Lis Pendens Filed by Respondent Stephen P. Wallace, removing the us pendens claims of Stephen P. Wallace as to the Subject Property. This order was filed with the Office of the Tulsa County Clerk as Document No. 2008127374 (Exhibit P). (A true and correct copy of the referenced documents is attached and the Court may take judicial notice of them pursuant to 12 O.S. § 2202)

II. On or about January 13, 2009, Plaintiffs requested in writing that the Defendants correct the title defect. Defendants refused without reasonable cause to correct the title defect prior to the filing of this lawsuit. (Exhibit Q)

POST-PETITION LIS PENDENS CLAIMS

On or about March 2, 2009, Defendant Stephen P. Wallace filed a Notice of Lis Pendens in the Office of the Tulsa County Clerk as Document No. 200900247 (Exhibit R), which claims an interest in the Subject Property owned by Plaintiffs and references these proceedings. (A true and correct copy of the referenced documents is attached and the Court may take judicial notice of them pursuant to 12O.S. § 2202)

On or about May 29, 2009, Defendant Stephen P. Wallace entered into an Agreed Order Releasing Lis Pendens, signed by Joan Godlove, as well as counsel for Plaintiffs and Hon.

J. Michael Gassett. This order was filed with the Office of the Tulsa County Clerk as Document No. 2011 062382. (Exhibit 5) (A true and correct copy of the referenced documents is attached and the Court may take judicial notice of them pursuant to 12 O.S. § 2202)

Despite multiple orders from different courts as to the frivolity of their claims, and their own previous agreement to remove the Lis Pendens, Mary Roma Jage, Stephen P. Wallace, and Joan Godlove again filed a Notice of Lis Pendens as to the Subject Property on February 8, 2011. This document was filed with the Office of the Tulsa County Clerk as Document No. 2011011781. (Exhibit T) (A true and correct copy of the referenced documents is attached and the Court may take judicial notice of them pursuant to I 2 O.S. § 2202)

On information and belief, or about July 21, 2011, the 2009 Agreed Order (Exhibit 5, supra) was re-submitted and filed in order to attempt to cure title questions as a result of the February 8, 2011 Lis Pendens filing. This document was filed with the Office of the Tulsa County Clerk as Document No. 2011062382. (Exhibit U) (A true and correct copy of the referenced documents is attached and the Court may take judicial notice of them pursuant to 12
O.S. § 2202)

On July 7, 2011, the Hon. Daman Cantrell entered an Order Cancelling, Releasing, and Discharging Documents in the Nature of Notice of Lis Pendens Filed by Respondents Mary Roma Jage and Stephen P. Wallace In the Land Records of Tulsa County in In re Frank A. Wallace Revocable Trust dated December 4, 1974, et al, Tulsa County Case No. P12003 46 and PT 2002 56. This document was filed with the Office of the Tulsa County Clerk as Document No. 2011057971. (Exhibit V) (A true and correct copy of the referenced documents is attached and the Court may take judicial notice of them pursuant to 12 OS. § 2202)

As of March 2008, Yorktown had entered into contracts to sell numerous lots in the Subject Property for over $5,000,000.00.

The us pendens filings and related misconduct by Defendants have caused Plaintiffs in excess of $1,370,000.00 in harm resulting from lost business opportunity. This is calculated based upon Yorktown’s internal review of annual holding costs for the two and a half year period, between January 2009 and July 2011, when it was unable to sell portions of the Subject Property to prospective buyers because of the various Notices of Lis Pendens. (Ex. W, Murphy Affidavit)

Outcome: Summary judgment in favor of Plaintiffs.

Plaintiff's Experts:

Defendant's Experts:

Comments:



Find a Lawyer

Subject:
City:
State:
 

Find a Case

Subject:
County:
State: