Opinion ID: 2204996
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Kent Corporate Park

Text: The Partridges owe much of their prosperity to an investment in four warehouses located in Kent, Washington known as Kent Corporate Park (KCP). The four buildings sit on two separate parcels. Lot three contains buildings A and B with approximately 65,601 square feet of rentable space and a monthly base rent of $28,168. Lot four contains buildings C and D with 72,553 square feet of rentable space and a monthly base rent of $32,837. The two lots were separately owned until 1998 when the Partridges' predecessor-in-interest purchased them. If the two parcels had been owned separately at the time of trial, the owner of lot four would have needed an easement across lot three to access the only available road. The Partridges acquired KCP in 2001. The acquisition was the culmination of two tax-exempt exchanges spanning the previous decade, with each exchange resulting in ownership of an investment property of successively greater value. [2] The trial court adopted Erlinda's $9,027,288 valuation of KCP. At this value, KCP had a total divisible equity of $3,541,375. James never actively disputed KCP's status as marital property at trial; he referred to it as held jointly and as a marital asset on several occasions. Although KCP's equity comprises half of the marital estate, it produced nearly two-thirds of the Partridges' monthly income at the time of trial. [3] A manager handled the day-to-day operation of the warehouses and performed [n]inety-eight percent of the business management for KCP during the marriage. Notably, six-figure maintenance burdens such as a roof replacement and flooding repairs created negative cash flow for KCP in some recent years. James had exclusive access and control over income from KCP during the separation period. This included his unilateral settlement of a lawsuit arising from a tenant's environmental contamination of part of KCP for $400,000. James did not inform Erlinda of the settlement amount until compelled to do so by the court. [4] He spent much of the approximately $259,000 in net settlement proceeds to purchase property in Wasilla. James also took twenty-two monthly draws of $8,000 each and $120,000 of additional draws from KCP during the separation period. Erlinda received no income from KCP during this time and testified that she borrowed funds from family members to pay her living expenses. The trial court awarded KCP entirely to Erlinda.