McCune v. McCune

California Court of Appeal Oct 26, 1937 No. Civ. 5923Published

Before: Pullen

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that an after-acquired title obtained by a grantor through a judicial sale is an independent title that does not enure to the benefit of a prior grantee or mortgagee, and thus the purchaser of such title is not estopped from asserting it against them.

Issues

Whether an after-acquired title obtained by a grantor through a judicial sale enures to the benefit of a prior grantee or mortgagee.
Whether a party is estopped from asserting an independent title acquired after the execution of a mortgage.

Disposition. reversed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“If the property is sold as the grantee’s at an execution or judicial sale, the grantor is not estopped by his covenant from purchasing at the sale and asserting the title thus acquired against the grantee.”

“the after-acquired title of Crary acting for McCune did not pass to Alma McCune.”

PULLEN, P. J.

This appeal is from that portion of a judgment decreeing that E. Avery Crary is the owner in fee 'simple of an undivided ll/17ths interest in certain real property situated in the county of Los Angeles, subject to a mortgage of Carroll Allen in the sum of $800, together with interest and attorney fees.

The action was commenced by appellant Alfred W. Mc-Cune and his sister, Marie Menard McCune, a minor, by her guardian

ad litem,

against Alma McCune, Carroll Allen the holder of the mortgage in question, and certain others.

The record discloses that on March 12, 1932, Alfred W. Mc-Cune and Marie Menard McCune, then a minor, conveyed the lot in question to their mother Alma McCune who, on the same day reeonveyed ll/TTths interest in this property to Alfred W. McCune and 6/17ths to Marie Menard McCune, reserving a life estate therein to herself. It is alleged in the complaint that it was not the intention of the parties to these transfers that the various deeds be recorded, but nevertheless Alma McCune, without the knowledge or consent of her grantors, permitted the deed conveying title to her to be recorded December 15, 1932. On January 13, 1933, Alma Mc-Cune placed a mortgage upon the property in the sum of $1,000 in favor of E. H. Pell, as trustee for Carroll Allen. Before the mortgage of Alma McCune had been executed and prior to any recordation of any deed of transfer, L. S. Trigg brought suit against Alma McCune, and on March 24, 1932, recovered a judgment against her in the municipal court in Los Angeles.

Thereafter this property was sold to satisfy the judgment at a marshal’s sale and the interest of Alma McCune was purchased at said sale by L. S. Trigg. On January 21, 1935, E. Avery Crary purchased from Trigg, for a valuable consideration, the interest of Trigg in this property, which was, on the same day, conveyed by Trigg to Crary by a quitclaim deed.

Upon these facts the court concluded the judgment lien of Trigg attached to all the interest of the defendant Alma McCune in said real property and held the said judgment lien was prior and paramount to the lien of the mortgagee E. H. Pell, trustee for Carroll Allen, and that the title to the

[297]

McCune v. McCune

AI Brief

PULLEN, P. J.

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief