Erickson v. Bohne

California Court of Appeal Feb 2, 1955 No. Civ. 8504Published

Before: Schottky

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that the complaint sufficiently stated a cause of action against the resident defendant, thereby justifying the denial of the appellants' motion for a change of venue. Because the plaintiff alleged she was wholly without understanding when she signed the deed, the instrument was void ab initio, meaning it passed no title even to a subsequent bona fide purchaser.

Issues

Whether the complaint stated a cause of action against the resident defendant, Patricia Rebecca Pierce.
Whether the appellants were entitled to a change of venue to Alameda County based on the sufficiency of the complaint against the resident defendant.

Disposition. affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“A void deed passes no title, and cannot be made the foundation of a good title even under the equitable doctrine of bona fide purchase.”

“In view of our conclusion that a good cause of action was stated against defendant Patricia Rebecca Pierce, who admittedly was a resident of Sonoma County, the trial court correctly ruled that the motion for change of venue should be denied.”

SCHOTTKY, J.

Plaintiff filed a complaint against Edrie Mary Bohne, also known as Edrie M. Bohne, James L. Meegan and Beatrice Meegan, his wife, and Patricia Rebecca Pierce. The first three defendants reside in Alameda County and defendant Pierce resides in Sonoma County where the action was filed.

The complaint contains two counts. In the first count plaintiff seeks to recover from defendants and appellants Bohne and Meegan a money judgment in the sum of $4,500 and alleges in substance as follows: That on May 26, 1950, she was the owner of real property in Sonoma County; that she was then physically and mentally ill and wholly incapable of transacting business; that defendant Bohne, plaintiff’s daughter, and James Meegan, a friend of defendant Bohne, took advantage of her condition and their confidential relationship to her and fraudulently procured her execution and delivery of a deed conveying the property to Edrie M. Bohne; that at that time plaintiff did not know she was signing a deed to said real property and had no intention of signing such a deed; that she received no consideration for the conveyance; that Edrie Mary Bohne then conveyed the property to James L. Meegan, without consideration; that thereafter said defendant James L. Meegan and the defendant Beatrice Meegan, his wife, conveyed the property to defendant Patricia R. Pierce, receiving $4,500 in consideration therefor; that all three deeds were recorded, the first two being of record when Patricia Pierce bought the property ; that upon learning of these matters plaintiff demanded that her daughter and the Meegans pay over to her the money they received from Pierce, which they refused to do. She prays judgment against them in that sum. The second count contains the same allegations as the first count, save that it omits all reference to plaintiff’s demand that the Meegans and her daughter turn over to her the price received from Pierce. By her prayer to that count plaintiff demands that the three deeds be ordered delivered up, that

[555]

they be cancelled and adjudged to be void and that all defendants be compelled to reconvey the real property to plaintiff.

Defendants Bohne, James L. Meegan and Beatrice Meegan appeared and filed a demurrer to said complaint and also filed a motion for change of place of trial to Alameda County. Said motion was denied and said defendants have appealed from the order denying same. Defendant Patricia Rebecca Pierce has not appeared in the action nor did she join in the motion for change of place of trial. This court has heretofore granted a writ of supersedeas staying the proceedings in the superior court until the issues raised on the appeal are decided.

Erickson v. Bohne

AI Brief

SCHOTTKY, J.

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief