Montalvo v. Guzman

Filed 2/15/06 Montalvo v. Guzman CA5

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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

FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

THE COURT^*

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Kern County. Arthur E. Wallace, Judge.

Donald C. Duchow for Plaintiff and Appellant.

Sandra Kuhn McCormack for Defendant and Respondent Jose Luis Garcia.

No appearance for Defendant and Respondent Laura Guzman.

-ooOoo-

Plaintiff Armando Montalvo appeals from a judgment entered after a bench trial that denied his claim for the imposition of a constructive trust on a single-family residence. The sole issue raised on appeal is whether the trial court's oral statement of decision was legally inadequate because it did not resolve a contested factual issue concerning the genuineness of a signature on a letter related to the sale of the residence to defendant Jose Luis Garcia (Garcia).

We conclude the trial court's oral statement of decision explained the legal basis for its decision on the dispute over the signature by stating that appellant had failed to carry his burden of proof that the signature on the letter was not genuine. Thus, the statement of decision complied with the requirements of Code of Civil Procedure section 632 (section 632). Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed.

FACTS AND PROCEEDINGS

A full recitation of the facts underlying the dispute between the parties over a single-family residence located in Bakersfield is not necessary because plaintiff raises only one issue on appeal: Did the trial court err in failing to making a specific finding of fact regarding the genuineness of a signature on a letter related to the contested real estate transaction? The facts critical to the resolution of that issue are set forth below.

During the bench trial, the parties disputed whether Sylvia Wilkinson, plaintiff's sister and unofficial caretaker, signed a letter dated July 28, 2003, which states:

â€