May a buyer record a second lis pendens on a property after the original lis pendens has been expunged?

De Martini v. Superior Court

Facts: A buyer and seller enter into a purchase agreement for commercial property. A dispute arises over the buyer’s obligation to deposit earnest money. The buyer and seller enter into arbitration and closing is postponed. The buyer petitions the court to enter judgment on the arbitration award and records a lis pendens clouding title to the property. The lis pendens is expunged and the buyer abandons the litigation. The buyer sues the seller in a separate lawsuit seeking to compel the seller to perform the purchase agreement, and records a second lis pendens. The seller seeks to invalidate the second lis pendens.

Claim: The seller claims the second lis pendens is improperly recorded and void since the first lis pendens was expunged and the second was filed by the same buyer on the same property without court authorization.

Counterclaim: The buyer claims the second lis pendens was properly recorded since the lis pendens only needs court authorization when the successive lis pendens is filed in the same litigation.

Holding: A California court of appeals holds the buyer improperly recorded a second lis pendens since the first lis pendens was expunged and the second, regardless of whether it was filed in the same litigation, was filed on the same property without court authorization. [De Martini v. Superior Court (2024) 98 CA5th 1269]

De Martini v. Superior Court (Gupta)