- 25 -
1298 (Utah 1972); Allred v. Allred, 393 P.2d 791 (Utah 1964).
Again, to reach an "option conclusion" here, we must accept
respondent's contention that the amounts the partnerships stood
to lose were de minimis in relation to the sale price.
Petitioners have made a strong case that equitable conversion
occurred at the time of the December 1983 agreements.
Accordingly the partnerships (buyers), based on the form of the
agreements, would bear any loss to the condominiums.
Profits. In the Williams opinion, the question of profits
from the condominiums was handled summarily because the
condominiums were unfinished and could not be rented. Here, the
condominiums were finished and rented. The December 1983
agreements, however, do not specify whether the seller or buyer
would be entitled to profits from the rental of the condominiums.
The December agreements did state that the buyers would receive
all the benefits and burdens of ownership. Here, again, the
question turns on whether the sellers or buyers had those
benefits and burdens of ownership. Accordingly, equitable
conversion at the time of signing the December 1983 agreements
would have a bearing on the issue. In addition, general partner
Derrick advised the condominium management company, relatively
soon after the execution of the December 1983 agreements, that
the partnerships had become the owners of the realty. After the
closing, accountings were made reflecting allocation of all
Page: Previous 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011