## Facts

- Judge Samuel W. Johnson owned land in what later became Wheat Ridge, Colorado.
- In 1955, Johnson deeded an approximately five-acre parcel to the Wheat Ridge Lions Foundation as a gift to be used for public-park purposes.
- In 1957, Johnson deeded an approximately 14-acre parcel to Jefferson County for the custody and management of the Wheat Ridge Recreation District.
- Both deeds required that the land be used as a public park named “Johnson Park.”
- The 1957 deed also required that, within specified time limits, the grantee provide an access road, clear fire hazards, and make available a public water supply and lavatories.
- In 1958, Johnson consented in writing to conveyance of the five-acre parcel to Jefferson County on behalf of the recreation district, subject to the original deed conditions.
- After the City of Wheat Ridge was incorporated in 1969, interests in both parcels were conveyed to the City, with Johnson’s consent, subject to the deed conditions.
- The park was used for public purposes, and the trial court found that all conditions were satisfied except that water and bathroom facilities were never installed on one parcel.
- Paul Johnson, as executor and heir of Judge Johnson’s estate, filed a quiet-title action seeking to retake the property based on (1) breach of conditions subsequent and (2) alleged undue influence in the making of the deeds.
- After a bench trial, the district court ruled for the City, concluding the action was barred by the statute of limitations and laches and that the evidence did not prove undue influence.

## Issues

1. Whether a quiet-title action seeking forfeiture/reversion for breach of deed conditions subsequent is barred by Colorado’s statute of limitations governing actions affecting interests in real property.
2. Whether the claim was also barred by laches based on delay and prejudice to the City and the public’s continued park use.
3. Whether the evidence established that Judge Johnson’s conveyances were procured by undue influence.

## Decision

- The Colorado Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment dismissing the quiet-title action.
- The court upheld the ruling that the estate’s attempt to enforce a forfeiture based on breach of a condition subsequent was barred by the applicable statute of limitations for actions affecting real property.
- The court also upheld dismissal on laches because the long delay and changed circumstances made it inequitable to disturb the City’s title to land used as a public park.
- The court affirmed the finding that there was insufficient evidence of undue influence; advanced age alone did not prove improper influence.

## Legal Principles

- A deed condition subsequent does not, by breach alone, automatically divest the grantee’s title; the grantor or successor must timely assert any right of re-entry/forfeiture through appropriate proceedings.
- An action to enforce a claimed forfeiture of title based on breach of a condition subsequent is subject to the statute of limitations applicable to actions affecting title or interests in real property.
- Laches can bar equitable relief when a claimant’s unreasonable delay prejudices others, including a municipality and the public that has relied on long-standing public use of the land.
- To set aside a deed for undue influence, the challenger must show influence that overcame the grantor’s free will; mere age or later regret is not enough.

## Conclusion

Because the executor waited too long to sue, the estate could not enforce any claimed forfeiture for the City’s alleged failure to complete all park-improvement conditions, and the court further held that laches independently barred relief; the record also supported the trial court’s finding that Judge Johnson’s deeds were not the product of undue influence, so title remained with the City.


Johnson v. City of Wheat Ridge, 532 P.2d 985 (1975)