Shelton v. Vance

California Court of Appeal Aug 20, 1951 No. Civ. 18187; Civ. 18188Published

Before: Vallee

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that the defendant acquired full title to the realty because the return of a deed to a grantor does not reconvey title and a decree of distribution cannot vest title in property the decedent did not own. However, the court reversed the denial of partition regarding personal property that the defendant had admitted in her pleadings was jointly owned.

Issues

Whether the return of a delivered deed to the grantor operates to retransfer title to real property.
Whether a decree of distribution in a decedent's estate can vest title in heirs to property the decedent did not own at death.
Whether a trial court may make a finding contrary to facts admitted in the pleadings.

Disposition. Affirmed in part and reversed in part.

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“Redelivering a grant of real property to the grantor, or canceling it, does not operate to retransfer the title.”

“A decree of distribution distributes only such title as the deceased had at the time of his death.”

“When allegations in a complaint are admitted by the answer, a finding thereon is unnecessary and a finding contrary thereto is error.”

VALLÉE, J.

These are appeals from judgments in two actions. They were consolidated for trial below and are submitted here on one set of briefs. They involve a parcel of realty which is improved with a furnished rooming house. Number 18187 also involves the furniture and furnishings in the rooming house.

[196]

Theodore Shelton brought 18187 for partition of the realty and the furniture and furnishings, and for an accounting of rents from the rooming house.

Virginia Vance brought 18188 to quiet title to the realty.

The judgment in 18187 was that Theodore take nothing by his complaint. Judgment in 18188 quieted title to the realty in Virginia. Theodore appealed from both judgments.

Theodore and Virginia are brother and sister. They had a sister Blanche, now deceased. On August 20, 1938, Theodore, Virginia and Blanche acquired title to the realty as joint tenants. On October 12, 1945, Blanche signed, acknowledged, and delivered a deed conveying her interest in the realty to Virginia. This deed was not recorded. It was absolute on its face. In February or March, 1947, Virginia returned this deed to Blanche. On August 19, 1947, Theodore conveyed his interest in the realty to William Vance, who conveyed it to Virginia.

Blanche died on January 22, 1948. A one-third interest in the realty was inventoried as a part of her estate, and the decree of distribution purported to distribute it to Theodore and Virginia.

The court found and decreed that Virginia owns the realty in fee and that Theodore has no interest therein. Theodore’s theory seems to be that the return by Virginia to Blanche of the deed theretofore delivered to Virginia by Blanche, in some fashion reconveyed a one-third interest in the property to Blanche, and that by reason of the decree of distribution in the estate of Blanche a one-sixth interest in the realty is vested in him. His claims as to the realty are untenable.

The deed from Blanche to Virginia severed the joint • tenancy as between the interest acquired by Virginia from Blanche and the interests held by Virginia and Theodore in joint tenancy. Virginia was then a tenant in common as to a one-third interest, and a two-thirds interest was held by her and Theodore in joint tenancy.

Shelton v. Vance

AI Brief

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief