According to Wang, one day in early 2006, Zhang said to him, "you know, you can sell the house to me if you want to." Wang says he was puzzled by the request at the time, but later realized that "Zhang had been thinking of taking back the house since then".

Wang says that, as expected, Zhang called on him later, saying, "I want my house back because your purchase was illegal." Being familiar with law through previous work experience, Wang says that he replied, "it's useless to argue about the legality with me. You've found the wrong person. You should go find the one who bought it from you." But according to Wang, by that time, Xu had died from a heart attack.

Zhang brought the dispute to court in October 2006.

According to the State Council circular on banning speculative landing trading issued in May 1999, "Farmers' residences shall not be traded to urban residents." State Council Decision on Deepening Reform of and Tightening Up Land Management (28 [2004] of the State Council) again banned "urban residents from purchasing rural housing land". The Ministry of Land and Resources has also made several statements to clarify that minor property rights, that is, rural real estate sold to urban residents, is not protected by law.

Complicating these strict regulations was the booming real estate industry since 2002. In Songzhuang, a house once available for 300 yuan a month iss now rented at 2,000 yuan. With their houses already sold and making greater profits, farmers were determined to take back their houses.

Artists based in Songzhuang were then sued one after another—the second being Fang Lijun, one of the first who moved to the town, then Li Yulan, then Yang Dawei. Within a month, 13 artists were sued.

In October 2006, Li received a notice from Ma that he would like to buy her house at 70,000 yuan, which the former bought at 45,000 yuan four years ago and had been renovated for several times thereafter.

Different Cases, Different Stages
Though Li was the third to be sued, her case was the first to be closed.

At 8:30am on December 28th, 2006, Tan Xiaoxun, Li's husband, together with some 30 artists, attended the hearing in Tongzhou District Court. Because Li was pregnant, Tan served as the defense. After hearing the case, the court suggested the dispute be settled through mediation.
Progress in the mediation went slowly until one day when Li signed her name on a house assessment report. It was later said that this signature, which meant Li agreed with the assessed value of the house, that made the judge come to a decision sooner than the other cases.

According to Li, she "signed the report because somebody threatened her". In April 2007, Li claimed, a court officer came to her and told her "if you don't agree to sign the assessment, we'll adjudge 70,000 yuan to you, as has been offered by the accuser ". Later the next month, Li received the assessment report, which valued her house at a total of 93,808 yuan.

On July 10th, 2007, Tongzhou District Court determined at first instance that "the house purchasing agreement signed by both parties is invalid; the defender shall give back the house to the accuser, and the accuser shall compensate the defender according to the house assessment report."

Li then appealed against the judge's decision to the Second Intermediate People's Court Of Beijing. The second instance turned out to maintain the initial decision while permit Li to make further appeals concerning compensation.
Another reason why Li's case was first closed, said Wang, was that related government departments doubted her identity as an artist, since Li was found not to have registered in Chinese Artists' Association. The importance of being certificated as an artist stems from the attitude of these related departments, which said previously that "the cases concerning artists should be put aside until corresponding law is promulgated".

Now, the 13 cases are progressing at different paces. Some artists are still anxious, Some are free from lawsuits—for example, Yang Dawei. According to his wife, on January 8th the former landowner decided to withdraw their claim after being persuaded by community leaders.