Keele v. Clouser

California Court of Appeal Oct 28, 1929 No. Docket No. 7107.Published

Before: Nourse

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that a deed recorded without delivery or the grantor's consent is void and subject to cancellation under Civil Code section 3412, and that the evidence sufficiently supported the trial court's findings of inadvertent recordation.

Issues

Whether the complaint sufficiently stated a cause of action for the cancellation of a deed under Civil Code section 3412.
Whether the evidence supported the trial court's findings that the deed was recorded by mistake and without authorized delivery.

Disposition. affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“All that is required under section 3412 of the Civil Code, “either in pleading or proof is to show the facts constituting the invalidity of the instrument, whether they involve fraud, duress, accident, mistake.””

“The evidence amply supports the finding that the recordation was made inadvertently.”

NOURSE, J.

Plaintiff sued under section 3412 of the Civil Code to have a deed which had been recorded through inadvertence and mistake delivered to her and canceled. Plaintiff had judgment' and the defendants appeal upon typewritten transcripts.

The complaint alleged the execution of a written contract by plaintiff and defendants for the sale of certain real property which in express terms provided for the delivery of a deed and certificate of title when the terms of the contract were fully complied with by the defendants. It alleged that at the time of entering into said contract and as a part of the same transaction plaintiff executed a deed for the purpose of conveying to defendants a clear title to the property involved when the terms of the contract had been met, and that “by inadvertence and mistake, and without the knowledge or consent of this plaintiff, and without delivery thereof, said instrument . . . was placed on record .

. that said instrument was . . . and now is void and of no effect.” A demurrer to the complaint was overruled and the defendants answered, denying the execution of the contract and alleging that the deed was duly and regularly recorded.

[502]

The code section under which the action was instituted reads: “A written instrument, in respect to which there is a reasonable apprehension that if left outstanding it may cause serious .injury to a person against, whom it is void or voidable, may, upon his application, be so adjudged, and ordered to be delivered up or canceled.”

Appellants attack the judgment on the ground that the complaint fails to state a cause of action. The argument seems to be that the facts constituting the alleged “inadvertence and mistake” are not pleaded with sufficient particularity. The allegations that the deed was never delivered to appellants and that it had been recorded without knowledge or consent of respondent were sufficients All that is required under section 3412 of the Civil Code, “either in pleading or proof is to show the facts constituting the invalidity of the instrument, whether they involve fraud, duress, accident, mistake.”

(Hironymous

Keele v. Clouser

AI Brief

NOURSE, J.

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief