Barajas v. Gomez

Filed 1/22/07  Barajas v. Gomez CA2/4

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b).  This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION FOUR

            APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los  Angeles County, Elizabeth Allen White, Judge.  Reversed with direction.

            Anderson, McPharlin & Conners, Jesse S. Hernandez, Joseph H. Catmull, and Vanessa H. Widener for Intervener and Appellant.

            Reed Smith, John S. Siamas, and Dennis Peter Maio for MERSCORP, Inc., and Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., as Amici Curiae on behalf of Intervener and Appellant.

            Cunningham & Treadwell, James H. Treadwell, and Ryan L. Arnett for Platinum Capital Group, as Amicus Curiae on behalf of Intervener and Appellant.

            Pierry Shenoi, Allan A. Shenoi, and Linda T. Pierce for Plaintiff and Respondent.

______________

            We reverse the order denying the appellant lien holder's motion for leave to intervene in a quiet title action in which the respondent obtained a default judgment that eliminated all liens against the property without naming any of the lien holders as defendants in the action.

BACKGROUND

            In February 2000, plaintiff and respondent Alfredo Barajas and defendant Pedro Gomez (Gomez is not a party to this appeal) purchased a residence in Wilmington (the property) as joint tenants.  Barajas and Gomez encumbered the property with a purchase money promissory note secured by a first trust deed for $186,254 (the Wells Fargo loan).

            On March 22, 2004, Barajas sued Gomez for breach of contract and dissolution of the partnership.  The basis for the lawsuit was the parties' alleged verbal partnership agreement to hold title to the property as joint tenants but with unequal interests.  Allegedly, Gomez would occupy the property in return for paying the property's monthly Wells Fargo loan installments, maintenance costs, and other expenses, and would eventually share equally in any increased value or profits and losses from the sale of the property.  Under the alleged agreement, if Gomez materially breached his partnership obligations, Gomez would lose all rights to the property and would forfeit his entire partnership interest in the property.  Barajas stated in the complaint that Gomez had breached his partnership obligations by defaulting on the Wells Fargo loan payments from August 2003 through March 2004, resulting in an arrearage of $13,525.51, which Barajas had cured.  Barajas claimed that as a result of Gomez's alleged breach of the partnership agreement, Gomez had surrendered his entire ownership interest in the property.

            On November 12, 2004, Barajas filed an amended complaint alleging that Gomez had fraudulently sold the property to a third party without Barajas's knowledge on April  26, 2004, and had forged Barajas's signature on the grant deed.  Barajas allegedly learned of the sale when he received a May 21, 2004 â€