Stratton v. Superior Court

California Court of Appeal Oct 5, 1948 No. Civ. 16622Published

Before: Wilson

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The probate court lacks jurisdiction to determine adverse claims to property between a guardianship estate and a stranger when the character of that property is disputed. Consequently, the court correctly sustained the demurrer and refused to adjudicate the petitioner's claims.

Issues

Does the superior court sitting in probate have jurisdiction to determine the character of property and indebtedness when a guardian disputes the petitioner's claim of community property?
Is a writ of mandate an appropriate remedy when the probate court refuses to exercise jurisdiction over a dispute between a guardian and a stranger to the estate?

Disposition. denied

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“the trial court rightly refused to determine the issues raised by the petition and the guardian’s objections.”

WILSON, J.

Petitioner is the husband of Cora L. Stratton, an incompetent person, of whose estate Security-First National Bank of Los Angeles is guardian. The guardian and the petitioner sold two parcels of real property alleged by petitioner to have been community property but the guardian asserted it to have been owned by them as tenants in common. Petitioner presented his amended petitions to the superior court sitting in probate for an order requiring the guardian to apply community property held by it in payment of an alleged community debt and for hospitalization of the incompetent and for an order directing delivery to petitioner of community property held by the guardian. A demurrer was filed by the guardian, together with objections raising issues of fact as to the character of the property and the indebtedness. The demurrer was sustained without leave to amend, after which judgment was entered reciting that the court found that the amended petitions did not state sufficient facts to constitute a cause of action and dismissing them for lack of jurisdiction.

Petitioner seeks a writ of mandate to compel the superior court to take jurisdiction of and to determine the controversy between petitioner and the guardian of his wife’s estate.

Petitioner maintains not only that the superior court sitting in probate should have entertained jurisdiction of his petitions but that it should have ordered the guardian to apply the funds in its possession as he requested for the reason that such funds were community property and therefore should be devoted to the satisfaction of the community indebtedness.

The guardian’s demurrer to the petition and its objections thereto filed in the superior court raised two issues: (1) whether the property held by the guardian is community property of the petitioner and the ward, and (2) whether the estate held by it is liable for the payment of the indebtedness and expenditures mentioned in the petition, and at the same time challenged the jurisdiction of the probate court to determine the question of title to the funds or any issue as to the character of the indebtedness. The question before us is: Had the court power to determine those issues in a guardian

[811]

ship proceeding, or must they he presented in an adversative action on the civil'side of the court ?

Stratton v. Superior Court

AI Brief

WILSON, J.

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief