• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

Have quitclaim deed in our name, now being sued by guardian of previous owner.

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

soldia

Junior Member
What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? California

In 2010, Owner A, an elderly man who had his full faculties, signed a quitclaim deed for one of his houses to his daughter, Owner B. His wife (Owner A-2), who has dementia, was concerned that she would not have a place to live should Owner A die, and asked that her name be on the deed. To resolve this issue and placate her mother, Owner B quitclaimed the house to her son, Owner C, and her mother, Owner A-2, as joint owners (50-50). Owner C lives out of state and did not want the house, and gifted his share through another quitclaim to Owner D (me) in 2011.

Owner A passed away later in the year in 2010. In 2011, Plaintiff A (Owner A's granddaughter and niece of Owner B) was granted conservatorship and guardianship of Owner A-2. Plaintiff A immediately placed Owner A-2 into an old-folks home, and then moved her daughter into the house, who lived there for 6 months rent-free. By that time, we were co-owners of the house, so we evicted the daughter and moved in ourselves to establish residency.

Plaintiff A is now suing Owner B, Owner C and Owner D, on behalf of Owner A-2. She claims that Owner A had dementia and did not have authority to sign the original quitclaim deed. We have gathered over one dozen letters from witnesses who claim that Owner A was in no way suffering from dementia prior to his death. We do not have medical records (as he died over 2 years ago), but we have evidence such as he paid all his bills on time up until the day he died, he was still driving and still had his license, plus witness accounts of interactions with him up until the day he died. Plaintiff A offered no evidence of her claim, other than her word.

In another related case, Owner B challenged the conservatorship and guardianship of Owner A-2, and is requesting to be made conservator due to evidence of misappropriation of Owner A-2's finances by Plaintiff A. If Owner B gains guardianship, we will move Owner A-2 back into hers and our house and care for her ourselves. Plaintiff A filed this quitclaim civil suit after her conservatorship was challenged, and we are certain this was done solely for retribution.

Owner B has a lawyer. We do not.

Should we file a Request for Dismissal? Plaintiff A has no proof to back her claim.

Or should we file an extension? The conservatorship hearing will be held next month. We think that if the court finds that Plaintiff A was stealing and not fit to be conservator or guardian, then she can no longer sue us on behalf of Owner A-2, anyway, right?

Or should we file a General Denial? We would claim that Plaintiff A is lying (she is). We would include all the letters and other evidence that we have that Owner A did not have dementia.

Or should we do something else? Plaintiff A is questioning the validity of the original quitclaim deed. If that deed is invalid, then ours is too. If that deed is valid, then ours is too. So it all hinges on that original deed, which belonged to Owner B, not us.

Thanks!
 
Last edited:


tranquility

Senior Member
Um...get an attorney. You have As and Bs all the way through combined with legal conclusions with no facts and are missing a ton of basic facts; the internet is not going to be able to help you.

Can I imagine a successful suit against your ownership rights? Damn Skippy.

You have so many issues it is even hard to pick out the most material ones.

Attorney, attorney, attorney; at least if the property is important to you.
 

Mass_Shyster

Senior Member
Owner B has a lawyer. We do not.
You need your own lawyer. Owner B has nothing to lose since she already gave away her interest in the property. Her lawyer will not represent your interest, since you still have a stake.

You need your own lawyer, and you need to file an answer to the complaint or a default judgment may be issued.
 

soldia

Junior Member
Well, considering we can't afford the lawyer (which is why I'm posting here and talking to as many people as I can), we're representing ourselves. Not ideal. But no other choice.

We are filing a general denial with our affidavits. We considered filing a motion to stay until after the conservatorship has been decided, but not sure it matters, so we're just going to respond to the suit now. The house is not so important to us as the ability to bring grandma (A-2) home to live in it and be cared for by her own family. We would like to retain ownership of it now for that reason alone, because if the conservator gets it, grandma will never be allowed to come home. If the courts decide this case on the claim of one person (with no proof of her claim), then I don't see how a lawyer can help us anyway.

Sorry to have confused you with As and Bs. I did not want to use names.

Also, if the only answer is "get a lawyer," I'm not sure what this site if for. Lawyers trolling for customers/clients, I suppose?
 

tranquility

Senior Member
Well, considering we can't afford the lawyer (which is why I'm posting here and talking to as many people as I can), we're representing ourselves. Not ideal. But no other choice.

We are filing a general denial with our affidavits. We considered filing a motion to stay until after the conservatorship has been decided, but not sure it matters, so we're just going to respond to the suit now. The house is not so important to us as the ability to bring grandma (A-2) home to live in it and be cared for by her own family. We would like to retain ownership of it now for that reason alone, because if the conservator gets it, grandma will never be allowed to come home. If the courts decide this case on the claim of one person (with no proof of her claim), then I don't see how a lawyer can help us anyway.

Sorry to have confused you with As and Bs. I did not want to use names.

Also, if the only answer is "get a lawyer," I'm not sure what this site if for. Lawyers trolling for customers/clients, I suppose?
You are going to lose the house if you are not represented so you might as well plan on that now. A lawyer helps you make a legal argument. I understood the A's and B's, I was merely commenting on the complexity of the issues and the number of parties involved. This site is not for the practice of law but for:

IMPORTANT NOTICE
FreeAdvice.com has been providing millions of consumers with outstanding information and "advice" free since 1995 with thousands of professionally prepared and reviewed articles, questions and answers in more than 100 categories in the Question and Answer pages at FreeAdvice.com. THE VIEWS EXPRESSED ON THIS AND OTHER FORUM PAGES WERE NOT REVIEWED BY THE EDITORIAL STAFF OR ATTORNEYS AT FREEADVICE.COM and are provided AS IS. The FreeAdvice Forums are intended to enable consumers to benefit from the experience of other consumers who have faced similar legal issues. FreeAdvice does NOT vouch for or warrant the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any posting on the Forums or the identity or qualifications of any person asking questions or responding on the Forums. Use of the Forums is subject to our Disclaimer and our Terms and Conditions of use which prohibit advertisements, solicitations or other commercial messages, or false, defamatory, abusive, vulgar, or harassing messages, and subject violators to a fee for each improper posting. All postings reflect the views of the author but become the property of FreeAdvice. Information on FreeAdvice or a Forum is never a substitute for personal advice from an attorney licensed in your jurisdiction you have retained to represent you. To locate an attorney visit AttorneyPages.com. Copyright since 1995 by Advice Company. All Rights Reserved.
 

Zigner

Senior Member, Non-Attorney
Also, if the only answer is "get a lawyer," I'm not sure what this site if for. Lawyers trolling for customers/clients, I suppose?

IMPORTANT NOTICE
FreeAdvice.com has been providing millions of consumers with outstanding information and "advice" free since 1995 with thousands of professionally prepared and reviewed articles, questions and answers in more than 100 categories in the Question and Answer pages at FreeAdvice.com. THE VIEWS EXPRESSED ON THIS AND OTHER FORUM PAGES WERE NOT REVIEWED BY THE EDITORIAL STAFF OR ATTORNEYS AT FREEADVICE.COM and are provided AS IS. The FreeAdvice Forums are intended to enable consumers to benefit from the experience of other consumers who have faced similar legal issues. FreeAdvice does NOT vouch for or warrant the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any posting on the Forums or the identity or qualifications of any person asking questions or responding on the Forums. Use of the Forums is subject to our Disclaimer and our Terms and Conditions of use which prohibit advertisements, solicitations or other commercial messages, or false, defamatory, abusive, vulgar, or harassing messages, and subject violators to a fee for each improper posting. All postings reflect the views of the author but become the property of FreeAdvice. Information on FreeAdvice or a Forum is never a substitute for personal advice from an attorney licensed in your jurisdiction you have retained to represent you. To locate an attorney visit AttorneyPages.com. Copyright since 1995 by Advice Company. All Rights Reserved.


This site is NOT here for complex and multi-faceted legal matters. You need an attorney.
 

Mass_Shyster

Senior Member
OK, here goes. There are many reasons this is not a do-it-yourself case, but all you've got to lose is the house and possibly paying the other side's legal fees, though that seems unlikely unless you do something really bad.


In 2010, Owner A, an elderly man who had his full faculties, signed a quitclaim deed for one of his houses to his daughter, Owner B.
Did Owner A own the property in fee simple? Were there any co-owners? Did the deed meet the legal requirements to transfer the interest in the property? Was the deed recorded?

Owner B quitclaimed the house to her son, Owner C, and her mother, Owner A-2, as joint owners (50-50).
Same questions as above

Owner C lives out of state and did not want the house, and gifted his share through another quitclaim to Owner D (me) in 2011.
How did this "gift" occur? Through a properly executed deed? - same questions as above

By that time, we were co-owners of the house, so we evicted the daughter
That's kind of interesting, since Owner A is still co-owner, she, through her guardian, should have been allowed to let anyone she wanted to live there. Was this a legal eviction or a constructive eviction?

Plaintiff A is now suing Owner B, Owner C and Owner D, on behalf of Owner A-2. She claims that Owner A had dementia and did not have authority to sign the original quitclaim deed.
If owner A owned the property, then Owner A's authority to sign the deed cannot be disputed. I suspect the claim is that Owner A did not have the capacity to sign the deed.

We have gathered over one dozen letters from witnesses who claim that Owner A was in no way suffering from dementia prior to his death.
Letters are worthless. If you can get those people to sign affidavits, you may be able to include them with your pleadings, but they won't be admissable if you go to trial. You'll need to get those people to testify in court.

We do not have medical records (as he died over 2 years ago), but we have evidence such as he paid all his bills on time up until the day he died, he was still driving and still had his license, plus witness accounts of interactions with him up until the day he died.
Hopefully, you'll be able to get this evidence into an admissable form.

Plaintiff A offered no evidence of her claim, other than her word.
That evidence would not be filed with the complaint. That would be filed with the opposition to the motion to dismiss.


In another related case, Owner B challenged the conservatorship and guardianship of Owner A-2, and is requesting to be made conservator due to evidence of misappropriation of Owner A-2's finances by Plaintiff A. If Owner B gains guardianship, we will move Owner A-2 back into hers and our house and care for her ourselves. Plaintiff A filed this quitclaim civil suit after her conservatorship was challenged, and we are certain this was done solely for retribution.
I'm going to ignore this other case, as it is not material to the claim that Owner A had dementia.
Owner B has a lawyer. We do not.
As I wrote earlier, Owner B's attorney will not represent your interests. Owner B's attorney will be representing Owner B's interests, which are not the same as yours as Owner B no longer has any ownership interest in the property

Should we file a Request for Dismissal? Plaintiff A has no proof to back her claim.
That would be a motion to dismiss, not a request. Correct terminology is critical to any court proceeding.

Or should we file an extension? The conservatorship hearing will be held next month. We think that if the court finds that Plaintiff A was stealing and not fit to be conservator or guardian, then she can no longer sue us on behalf of Owner A-2, anyway, right?
You mean a motion to stay?

Or should we file a General Denial?
I though you said you already did that.

We would claim that Plaintiff A is lying (she is).
That's probably the correct claim, but it belongs in a motion to dismiss or a motion for a summary judgment, not in a 'general denial'

We would include all the letters and other evidence that we have that Owner A did not have dementia.
See statement above regarding 'letters'. Also, proving a negative is impossible. You would want to show that Owner A had the capacity to sign.
 

tranquility

Senior Member
Letters are worthless. If you can get those people to sign affidavits, you may be able to include them with your pleadings, but they won't be admissable if you go to trial. You'll need to get those people to testify in court.
Testify as to their opinion as to if the person had dementia? Wouldn't that require an expert? As to all the "gifting" going on of houses, were there gift tax returns filed? How big was the original estate of each purported gifter?

I could go on and on as well. The bottom line is that we are not even in the issue area, just the gathering of facts area. This is going to be won by the side that is represented in summary judgement.
 

ecmst12

Senior Member
How can a lay person testify to something like "sanity"? What is the definition in this context? To me that sounds like something that a medical expert would need to opine on, unless it means something other than whether he had any mental disorders or clinically significant behaviors indicating lack of touch with reality.
 

tranquility

Senior Member
For the exam we studied the 5 S's that a lay person could give an opinion about:

Signature
Sobriety
Speed
Sanity
Something else (I don't remember)
Wow, not only are you right, but there's a FORM for it:
http://www.scscourt.org/forms_and_filing/forms/PB-4016.pdf
 

nextwife

Senior Member
Did any of these transfers occur during the five year "lookback" period, and did Mr or Mrs recieve gov't assistance for care?


Because that would be a problem even if dementia were not an issue, especially if gifted.
 
Last edited:

LdiJ

Senior Member
Did any of these transfers occur during the five year "lookback" period, and did Mr or Mrs recieve gov't assistance for care?
I do not think that the 5 year lookback period would even apply to this particular asset.

A1 and A2 were married. A1 owned the house by himself. The eventual ownership of the house (through all the transfers) ended up being A2 50% and D 50%. Since A2 is the one currently in assisted living there is no transaction for a lookback. She actually gained property she did not previously own.
 

latigo

Senior Member
What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? California

In 2010, Owner A, an elderly man who had his full faculties, signed a quitclaim deed for one of his houses to his daughter, Owner B. His wife (Owner A-2), who has dementia, was concerned that she would not have a place to live should Owner A die, and asked that her name be on the deed. To resolve this issue and placate her mother, Owner B quitclaimed the house to her son, Owner C, and her mother, Owner A-2, as joint owners (50-50). Owner C lives out of state and did not want the house, and gifted his share through another quitclaim to Owner D (me) in 2011.

Owner A passed away later in the year in 2010. In 2011, Plaintiff A (Owner A's granddaughter and niece of Owner B) was granted conservatorship and guardianship of Owner A-2. Plaintiff A immediately placed Owner A-2 into an old-folks home, and then moved her daughter into the house, who lived there for 6 months rent-free. By that time, we were co-owners of the house, so we evicted the daughter and moved in ourselves to establish residency.

Plaintiff A is now suing Owner B, Owner C and Owner D, on behalf of Owner A-2. She claims that Owner A had dementia and did not have authority to sign the original quitclaim deed. We have gathered over one dozen letters from witnesses who claim that Owner A was in no way suffering from dementia prior to his death.

We do not have medical records (as he died over 2 years ago), but we have evidence such as he paid all his bills on time up until the day he died, he was still driving and still had his license, plus witness accounts of interactions with him up until the day he died. Plaintiff A offered no evidence of her claim, other than her word.

In another related case, Owner B challenged the conservatorship and guardianship of Owner A-2, and is requesting to be made conservator due to evidence of misappropriation of Owner A-2's finances by Plaintiff A. If Owner B gains guardianship, we will move Owner A-2 back into hers and our house and care for her ourselves. Plaintiff A filed this quitclaim civil suit after her conservatorship was challenged, and we are certain this was done solely for retribution.

Owner B has a lawyer. We do not.

Should we file a Request for Dismissal? Plaintiff A has no proof to back her claim.

Or should we file an extension? The conservatorship hearing will be held next month. We think that if the court finds that Plaintiff A was stealing and not fit to be conservator or guardian, then she can no longer sue us on behalf of Owner A-2, anyway, right?

Or should we file a General Denial? We would claim that Plaintiff A is lying (she is). We would include all the letters and other evidence that we have that Owner A did not have dementia.

Or should we do something else? Plaintiff A is questioning the validity of the original quitclaim deed. If that deed is invalid, then ours is too. If that deed is valid, then ours is too. So it all hinges on that original deed, which belonged to Owner B, not us.

Thanks!
Respecting the following two sentences, please explain your use of present tense in one and past tense in the other.

1. “. . . we HAVE EVIDENCE such as he paid all his bills on time up until the day he died, he was still driving and still had his license, plus witness accounts of interactions with him up until the day he died.”

2. “Plaintiff A OFFERED NO EVIDENCE of her claim, other than her word.”

The first implies that the evidentiary hearing has yet to commence and the second that the case has been heard. And yet the heading of your post reads, ” . . . we are now being sued . . . “.

So adding up the score, it seems that the case is pending and awaiting the evidentiary trial. And if true, how do you now know what evidence Plaintiff A intends to introduce as proof of the state of the grantee’s competence at the time that he supposedly executed the QCD? Huh?

Also, I am willing to make you a bet.

Which is that when the time comes to unload this property the cotenants - meaning you and the then other selling co-owner - will not be able to provide the buyer with insurable, marketable title!

Not unless you can satisfy a California Superior Court judge via a quiet title action that the Owner A held that property as his sole an separate estate free and clear of any community property interest vested in his then wife, Owner A-2! And overcoming the evidentiary presumption that she did!

And even if the evidence were to show that Owner A had acquired the property prior to the marriage to A-2, or received it by way of gift or inheritance - post marriage, the knotty issue would then loom of whether or not there was an encumbrance against that property at the time of the marriage and if so, whether or not community property was used to retire that encumbrance. Because if community property was so employed then Mrs. A acquired a vested community property interest to the extent that such payments reduced principal.

(Which such quiet title action would be a unique anomaly inasmuch as the plaintiffs/co-owners would have somewhat converse interests inasmuch A-2 (or her representative/successor/heirs, etc.) would be attempting to quiet out what might be her community property interest that very same property.)

So you’ve got a lot more troubles ahead than contesting an action to unwind the original QCD.
 
Last edited:

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top