Aslan v. Harrel CA3

Filed 7/15/13 Aslan v. Harrel CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (San Joaquin) ----

J. ASLAN, C069072

Plaintiff and Appellant, (Super. Ct. No. 392010249494CUCOSTK) v.

J. HARREL et al.,

Defendants and Respondents.

The in pro. per. plaintiff in this case is trying hard to reap the benefits of owning a condominium without taking legal title. Her first amended complaint is not directed to her elderly mother, the trustee of the trust that holds legal title to the property, however, but to the lawyers she alleges should have protected her interest and completed a transfer of title to her daughter. The trial court sustained without leave to amend the lawyers‟ demurrer to the five causes of action for breach of contract, fraud, and breach of fiduciary duty. We affirm. PLEADING Because this is an appeal of a judgment of dismissal following the sustaining of a demurrer without leave to amend, we must assume the truth of the material factual

1

allegations properly pleaded in the first amended complaint. (Blank v. Kirwan (1985) 39 Cal.3d 311, 318.) A demurrer raises questions of law, not fact, and tests the legal sufficiency of the pleadings. (Donabedian v. Mercury Ins. Co. (2004) 116 Cal.App.4th 968, 994.) We will take judicial notice of any admissions or inconsistent statements plaintiff made in her original complaint, and in the absence of a satisfactory explanation for the inconsistency, we will consider them in reviewing the propriety of the demurrer. (Owens v. Kings Supermarket (1988) 198 Cal.App.3d 379, 383-384; Berg & Berg Enterprises, LLC v. Boyle (2009) 178 Cal.App.4th 1020, 1034.) The first amended complaint, unlike the original, utilizes a Judicial Council form with multiple attachments. Plaintiff J. Aslan, who is appearing in propria persona, is divorced, estranged from her siblings, at odds with her mother, and suffering a number of debilitating health disorders. She alleges that she invested her “life savings” coupled with a generous gift from her parents to buy a condominium in Los Angeles in October of 1997. Fearful that her husband might obtain an interest in the property in what she anticipated would be upcoming divorce proceedings, she asked her parents to hold title to the property in the name of the family trust while she retained equitable ownership. They agreed. She continues to reside in the condominium with her daughter. Her father died in February of 2007, and her mother became sole trustee of the family trust. Plaintiff alleges that in October of 2007 she entered into a written contract with defendants, the Calone Law Group, LLP, and one of its partners, Jason Harrel. Plaintiff does not attach the contract as an exhibit to the complaint, nor does she describe in detail the terms of the agreement. She does allege, “Plaintiff engaged defendants J. HARREL and CLG to perform legal services on behalf of Plaintiff as client. The objective of the services was to ensure that plaintiff could get clear title to the CONDO at 10535 Wilshire Boulevard, Los Angeles, of which Plaintiff was the equitable owner since its purchase on October 23, 1997, and to protect the CONDO against any liens or claims whether by creditors or family members asserting false claims to an interest in the CONDO not