Simon v. Underwood
2017 Ohio 2885
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2017Background
- Four siblings (Susan Simon, Sara Thompson, Jay Underwood, John Underwood) hold equal undivided life estates in ~147 acres spread across five noncontiguous parcels under their father’s will; 13 grandchildren are contingent remaindermen.
- Siblings formed the Underwood Family Partnership to manage the property; plaintiffs (the sisters) alleged mismanagement, below‑market rents, deterioration of improvements, and deadlock, and sought partition, accounting, and dissolution.
- Trial court appointed a commissioner to determine whether the life estates could be equitably partitioned; commissioner inspected the parcels and concluded the property could not be equitably divided and provided a fee‑simple appraisal ($736,500).
- The brothers objected to the commissioner’s report on three grounds: (1) the report lacked factual analysis/failed to consider alternatives for partition; (2) the commissioner appraised fee simple but did not value the life estates as required; and (3) the commissioner improperly included John’s alleged personal property/improvements (mobile home, well, septic) in the fee valuation.
- The trial court overruled the objections: it found the commissioner’s factual findings (noncontiguity, differing uses, limited frontage, erosion, deferred maintenance, small fields unsuitable for modern farming) adequate to support the conclusion that physical partition would cause manifest injury; it treated the mobile home, well, and septic as fixtures and included them in fee valuation; and it directed the brothers to submit life‑estate valuation calculations based on the fee appraisal.
- The appellate court affirmed the trial court, holding the commissioner’s report supplied sufficient factual basis, the fee appraisal was proper, and treatment of the mobile home and utilities as fixtures was supported by the record.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the commissioner’s report adequately explains why physical partition is impossible without manifest injury | Simon: commissioner made a good‑faith effort; report facts show division would cause manifest injury | Underwood bros: report lacks factual analysis, did not consider alternatives or compute loss, and thus fails R.C. § 5307.06/09 | Held: Report and testimony gave a sufficient factual basis (noncontiguity, differing parcel utility, limited frontage, erosion, deferred maintenance); trial court did not err in adopting it |
| Whether commissioner was required to value the life estates rather than only the fee simple | Simon: fee appraisal suffices as starting point; parties could submit valuation methodology for life estates | Underwood bros: commissioner should have valued life estates under R.C. § 5307.09 | Held: Trial court properly required fee appraisal first and ordered brothers to file life‑estate valuations based on that fee value; no reversible error |
| Whether John’s mobile home, well, and septic must be excluded from fee valuation as personal property | Simon: improvements are fixtures and properly included; any reimbursement claim is secondary | Underwood bros: mobile home is taxed separately and is personal property that should be deducted | Held: Mobile home affixed to foundation, addition, hurricane straps, removed wheels, and installations (well/septic) show intent to make fixture; properly included in fee valuation; reimbursement question deferred |
| Whether the brothers’ proposed alternative partitions (e.g., gifting 43 acres to John) were adequate to avoid sale | Simon: proposals are inequitable, landlocked, create easement/maintenance issues, and award disproportionate fee value to brothers | Underwood bros: their plan would avoid sale and allow physical partition without manifest injury | Held: Court found proposed divisions inequitable (access problems, value disparities); owelty would not remedy the imbalance; commissioner and court correctly rejected those alternatives |
Key Cases Cited
- McGill v. Roush, 87 Ohio App.3d 66 (2d Dist. 1993) (commissioner’s report in partition must provide factual basis allowing trial court independent review)
- Holland Furnace Co. v. Trumbull Sav. & Loan Co., 135 Ohio St. 48 (Ohio 1939) (fixture test: annexation, adaptability, intent to make permanent)
- Forest Park Properties, Inc. v. Pine, 9 Ohio App.2d 348 (Ohio Ct. App.) (quasi‑judicial nature of commissioner’s partition power and consequences when assembly value exceeds divided value)