Bendish v. Castillo - No. 20110122
Cendak Development Corporation and Fort Rice Bar & Grill, Inc., appeal from a judgment entered in favor of Richard and Mary Bendish, cancelling a contract for deed and holding Cendak and Fort Rice Bar & Grill had no right to redeem the property.
The Bendishes sued to cancel a contract for deed entered into with James Castillo in March 2003, to purchase the Bendishes' property near Fort Rice, North Dakota. In 2006, Richard Bendish, Castillo, and Cendak executed a "Lease Purchase Agreement," purportedly assigning the contract for deed to Cendak, owned and managed by Ivan Gange. Castillo, and then Gange, operated the Fort Rice Bar & Grill on the premises. In November 2010, a trial was held in the district court. The parties disagreed as to the amount still owed on the contract for deed, whether the contract for deed was properly assigned to Cendak, and whether Castillo or Cendak was in default. After trial, the court found Castillo was in default under the contract for deed and Cendak was in default under the lease purchase agreement. The court cancelled the contract for deed and held neither Castillo nor Cendak had the right to redeem the property.
On appeal, Cendak and Fort Rice Bar & Grill argue the district court erred when it failed to give Cendak a period of redemption. The Bendishes argue that a person with no interest in a real estate title, whether through conveyance, lien or otherwise, does not have the right to redeem from the cancellation of a contract for deed.