Estate of Cabrera CA6

Filed 2/20/25 Estate of Cabrera CA6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

Estate of EVARISTO CABRERA et al., H051555 Deceased. (Santa Cruz County Super. Ct. No. 23PR00234)

SERGIO CABRERA,

Petitioner and Respondent,

v.

OSCAR AMEZCUA CABRERA,

Objector and Appellant.

Petitioner Sergio Cabrera petitioned to reform a deed for real property he owned with his parents, decedents Evaristo and Virginia Cabrera. He alleged that the 1991 deed incorrectly listed the owners as tenants in common when their mutual intention was to hold the property as joint tenants. Objector Oscar Amezcua Cabrera opposed the petition, arguing that the deed was accurate, and raising laches and statute of limitations defenses. The probate court granted the petition after an unreported hearing, reforming the deed to vest title in petitioner and his now deceased parents as joint tenants. Objector argues on appeal that the probate court was wrong to reject his defenses. For the reasons explained here, we will affirm the order.

I. PROBATE COURT PROCEEDINGS A grant deed recorded in 1991 vested title to real property in the City of Watsonville in petitioner and decedents, as follows: “Sergio Cabrera an unmarried man as to an undivided 1/2 interest; Evaristo H. Cabrera and Virginia G. Cabrera husband and wife as joint tenants as to an undivided 1/2 interest as tenants in common.” (Some capitalization omitted.) Petitioner commenced this action to reform the deed in 2023. (Citing Prob. Code, § 850.) The verified petition alleged that petitioner purchased the subject property with his parents because he was “too young to qualify for financing.” They “intended title to the Property to be held in joint tenancy between the Petitioner and Decedents.” The petition cited escrow instructions that were attached to the petition. The printed escrow instructions listed title as follows: “Sergio Cabrera, an unmarried man and Evaristo H. Cabrera and Virginia G. Cabrera, husband and wife as.” (Some capitalization omitted.) There are handwritten notes on the escrow instructions. One handwritten arrow points to petitioner’s name with the note, “1/2 int.” Another arrow points to decedents’ names with the note, “1/2 int.” And at the end of the title description is handwritten, “Joint Ten[illegible].” The petition alleged that the “escrow officer did not explain that in order for the three owners to be joint tenants, they would need to be equal 1/3 owners.” And because “Petitioner and Decedents did not need to sign the Grant Deed, they did not have the opportunity to question the titling, nor did they later have the opportunity to learn that titling was incorrect.” The petition alleged the grant deed’s “titling was a mistake and not what Petitioner and Decedents intended.” Decedents died intestate. The petition alleged the property “flooded in the recent storms and Petitioner cannot seek FEMA disaster assistance without all property owners joining the FEMA application.” Petitioner sought an order reforming the grant deed to reflect that he and decedents held the property as joint tenants. The petition included the names and contact 2