Bellue v. Bellue

Filed 6/16/06 Bellue v. Bellue CA4/2

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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

FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION TWO

APPEAL from the Superior Court of San Bernardino County. Christopher J. Warner, Judge. Affirmed.

Fullerton, Lemann, Schaefer & Dominick, Wilfrid C. Lemann, Lee B. Madinger

and Emma D. Enriquez for Plaintiff, Cross-defendant and Appellant.

Ward & Ward and Alexandra S. Ward for Defendants, Cross-complainants and Respondents.

1. Introduction

This appeal concerns an unfortunate family dispute about title to real property, a single family residence on East Palm Avenue in Redlands. The father, George Robert Bellue, Sr., (George) sued three of his adult children, claiming he never intended to grant them a joint tenancy interest in his property.^[1] The trial court gave judgment in favor of the children.

On appeal, George argues the court erred in dismissing his cause of action for elder abuse and erred by denying his request for a jury trial. In addition, he contends the court's findings were not supported by substantial evidence. We uphold the trial court's rulings and affirm the judgment.

2. Factual and Procedural Background

Plaintiff and his wife, Delberta Bellue, had four children, Sherry Janeen Breidel, Donna Lynne Bellue, George Robert Bellue, Jr., and Charles Bellue (Sherry, Donna, Bob, and Charles). Charles is not a defendant because he executed a quitclaim deed to his father. Defendants are George's two daughters, Sherry and Donna, and his son, Bob, and his wife, Shirley M. Young-Bellue (Shirley).

George was born on February 1, 1923. He is retired. George and Delberta lived together in the East Palm Avenue house for two years until her death on October 27, 1990. On January 31, 1991, George signed an affidavit of death of joint tenant and a grant deed removing Delberta's name and placing himself and his four children on the title to the property as joint tenants. Bob testified that his father told him he wanted to give the house to the children.

On November 4, 1991, George signed a trust instrument and a deed quitclaiming his one-fifth interest in the property into a revocable living trust. He also signed a premarital agreement designating the East Palm Avenue property as his separate property. The trust provided that, upon George's death, all the property should be sold and distributed equally to his children.

George married Amada Priscilla Bellue (Priscilla) on November 8, 1991.

Almost nine years later, in July 2000, Charles and Bob's wives and Priscilla executed an interspousal grant deed, prepared by Shirley, to George and the four adult children.

On November 29, 2001, as a trustee of the revocable living trust, George executed a grant deed of the trust's one-fifth interest to himself and the four children. In November 2001, George had incurred credit card debt of about $20,000. Initially, he wanted to sell the property but he could not do so because his children were joint tenants. Instead, he sought to obtain a $50,000 loan with assistance from Shirley, a loan broker.

To facilitate the loan, in March 2002, the four children executed a grant deed of the property to George.

After the loan funded, on April 12, 2002, George executed a grant deed of the property back to the four children and himself as joint tenants. The deed was not recorded until July 9, 2002.

In August 2002, George and Priscilla moved to Corona Del Mar. Bob found a tenant for the East Palm Avenue property. The rent was paid to George. The children agreed to give George a monthly sum of about $620 to cover repayment of the $50,000 loan and any expenses for the rental property. At the time of the trial in September 2004, the property was being rented for $1,395 a month.

In December 2003, George filed a complaint for fraud, elder abuse (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 15657), and other causes of action. Defendants answered and filed a cross-complaint for partition, claiming three-fifths interest in the property.

Bob, Sherry, and Donna all testified George told them he wanted to put their name on the title to the property after their mother died. Both Bob and George testified the children discouraged George from selling the property because it was his only asset.

After a court trial, the court gave judgment in favor of defendants and ordered a partition and sale of the property with George receiving two-fifths and three defendants, Sherry, Donna, and Bob, each receiving one-fifth of the proceeds.

3. Analysis

As the foundation to our discussion, we note that the two most significant events in this case occurred in March and April 2002. In March, the children executed a deed returning full ownership of the property back to George. At that point, he was free to sell the property unencumbered by their interest in it. Instead, he again executed a deed in April granting the property to himself and to the children in joint tenancy. The deed was not recorded until July 2002. George claims he did not know why he executed the deed or what it meant. But he also testified none of the defendants gave him any misleading information, or any information at all, about the deed or its effect. Although Shirley admitted she had assisted him in having the deed prepared, she did not undertake to have it recorded, as was apparently done months later.

George's first assignment of error is the trial court should not have granted a judgment on the pleadings on his claim for financial abuse of an elder. As defined by statute, â€