Segarini v. Bargagliotti

California Court of Appeal Sep 16, 1926 No. Docket No. 5523.Published

Before: Langdon

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. A judgment in a quiet title action does not preclude a party from asserting a title acquired after the issues were joined in that action, provided that the new title was not put in issue by a supplemental pleading.

Issues

Whether a judgment in a quiet title action bars a party from asserting a title acquired after the action was at issue but not pleaded via supplemental answer.
Whether the trial court erred by failing to make a specific finding of fact regarding the defense of res judicata when the underlying facts were undisputed.

Disposition. affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“The position that a judgment will not estop or preclude a party against whom it is rendered from relying upon a title acquired subsequently to the rendition of the judgment, or a title not in issue in that action, is too clear and well settled”

LANGDON, P. J.

This appeal is hy the defendants from a judgment against them in an action of ejectment. To understand the legal question presented by the appeal, matters occurring prior to the present action, as disclosed by the evidence, must be recited.

On March 19, 1920, the defendants and appellants herein, Francisca Bargagliotti and her husband, commenced an action against the plaintiff and respondent Segarini and others to remove the cloud of certain judgments from their title to the property involved in this action. The

[348]

complaint, besides the usual allegations in a quiet title action, contained an averment that the Bargagliottis had declared a homestead upon said property on the fifteenth day of May, 1917.

Segarini filed his answer to said quiet title suit, wherein he set up as his sole defense that he had obtained a judgment against the Bargagliottis on the thirteenth day of March, 1918, for something over seven hundred dollars and he prayed that this judgment be declared a lien upon the property.

On March 26, 1920, the Banca Popolare Fugazi, which held a mortgage upon this same property and which had not been made a party defendant in said quiet title action, commenced an action to foreclose said mortgage, making both the Bargagliottis and Segarini defendants in the foreclosure suit. All defendants in the foreclosure suit defaulted and the bank obtained a decree of foreclosure on December 5, 1921.

On January 4, 1922, nearly two years after the quiet title suit was at issue, the property was sold by the court commissioner pursuant to said decree of foreclosure and Segarini purchased the property at said sale and obtained a commissioner’s certificate of sale.

On March 23, 1922, the Bargagliottis, after they had no further interest in the property except their equity of redemption, brought the quiet title action to trial, and Segarini, having failed to appear at the trial, obtained a judgment quieting their title against him.

Later, and on January 9, 1923, Segarini obtained a commissioner’s deed to the property which was duly recorded, and on March 1, 1923, this action was commenced in ejectment.

Segarini v. Bargagliotti

AI Brief

LANGDON, P. J.

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief