Svaco

Svaco v. Fusina CA4/1

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 18, 2013D058954California7,720 words

Opinion

Opinion

Aaron, J.

I.

INTRODUCTION

Joseph Fusina purchased a five-acre parcel of undeveloped land (the Fusina Parcel

or Fusina's Parcel) from Eveline Bustillos (Eveline). At the time of the sale, Eveline also

owned a separate parcel (the Eveline Parcel or Eveline's Parcel) located in the same

general vicinity as the Fusina Parcel. Around the time of the sale of the Fusina Parcel,

Eveline transferred Eveline's Parcel to a trust, of which Esther Keefe Svaco is the trustee,

and Eveline and others are beneficiaries. Neither Fusina's Parcel nor Eveline's Parcel is

adjacent to a public road. Access to Fusina's Parcel and Eveline's Parcel is gained by way

of a private access road (Access Road) that traverses several parcels,1 including Eveline's

Parcel and Fusina's Parcel. The Access Road reaches Eveline's Parcel first, then splits

and continues on to Fusina's Parcel.

Svaco filed this lawsuit in which she contended that a provision in the covenants,

conditions, and restrictions (CC&Rs) governing Fusina's Parcel and Eveline's Parcel

required Fusina to contribute one-third of the costs related to improvements to the Access

Road.…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.