Field v. Andrada

California Supreme Court Feb 16, 1895 No. No. 19461Published

Before: Fleet

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that an administrator lacks the capacity to sue to enforce a trust in lands and that a complaint to set aside a fraudulent conveyance under section 1589 of the Code of Civil Procedure is fatally defective if it fails to allege the existence of creditors with allowed claims or judgments and an insufficiency of estate assets.

Issues

Does an administrator have the capacity to maintain an action to enforce a trust in lands?
Must an administrator allege the existence of creditors with allowed claims or judgments to maintain an action under section 1589 of the Code of Civil Procedure?
Does a complaint sufficiently allege a deficiency of assets when it fails to account for personal property held by third parties that the administrator is presumed to recover?

Disposition. reversed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“Treating it as an action of the former character, the plaintiff, administrator, had no capacity to sue, and the demurrer on that ground should have been sustained”

“The obvious intent and meaning of this section is that two things must concur to authorize the administrator to commence an action to set aside a deed of his intestate as void against creditors: 1. There must exist creditors to be paid; and 2.”

“To constitute a creditor within the meaning of the statute, “ he must be a creditor whose claim has been allowed by the administrator, or is evidenced by a judgment.””

Synopsis

Estates of Deceased Persons—Action to Enforce Trust in Lands— Incapacity of Administrator to Sue.—An administrator has no capacity to bring an action to enforce a trust in lands conveyed by the decedent in his lifetime, and to compel a conveyance of the legal title.

Id.—Fraudulent Conveyance—Defective Complaint.—An administrator cannot maintain an action to set aside a deed of his testator as void against creditors unless it appears from the complaint both that there are creditors to be paid and that there is an insufficiency of assets in the hands of the administrator to meet their demands.

Id.—Creditors—Claims not Allowed.—Until the estate has been charged with claims by allowance or judgment there is no basis for a bill by the administrator to set aside a fraudulent conveyance against the decedent to recover means to pay them, and a complaint averring that there are no allowed claims, but that there are creditors whose claims have not as yet been presented against the estate, and that the time for the presentation of claims has not yet expired, shows upon its face that there are no such creditors as are necessary for a recovery.

Id—Insufficiency of Assets—Personal Property Taken by Trespassers—Presumption.—A complaint showing that the personal property of the decedent is in the possession of others who claim it as their own, and against whom a suit for the recovery thereof by the administrator is pending and undetermined, and which does not allege the amount or value of the personal property, does not show an insufficiency of assets to sustain a suit to set aside a fraudulent conveyance of real estate; hut it must he presumed that the personal property of the estate taken hy trespassers without right will be recovered by the administrator in the performance of his duty, and that it will be sufficient to meet the demands of the creditors of the estate.

Id.—Conjunctive Special Demurrer—Specifications of Uncertainty. A conjunctive demurrer on the general grounds of ambiguity, unintelligibility, and uncertainty will be regarded only as a demurrer for uncertainty, where the only specifications made are on, the ground of uncertainty.

Van Fleet, J. This is an appeal from the judgment upon the judgment-roll.

The demurrer to the complaint should have been sustained. The complaint presents something of a double aspect. The action is brought by the administrator of a deceased person to set aside a conveyance of certain real property made by the decedent in his lifetime. There are allegations which lend to the complaint the complexion of an action to enforce a trust in lands and compel a reconveyance of the legal title, while there are other features of the complaint tending to give it the character of an action under section 1589 of the Code of Civil Procedure, to set aside a conveyance made by the intestate in fraud of his creditors. Treating it as an action of the former character, the plaintiff, administrator, had no capacity to sue, and the demurrer on that ground should have been sustained: (Janes v. Throckmorton, 57 Cal. 387.) In that case it was held that while the administrator is entitled to the possession of the property of the estate, real and personal, during the administration, and can maintain an action for the re[109]covery of the possession of all such property, he has no general power as such to maintain an action to enforce a trust in lands or compel a conveyance of the title to the property to himself; and that the statute does not confer upon him any such authority. That was an action brought by the heirs, and it was objected that it should have been brought in the name of the administrator. It is there said: “ The present action is brought to establish a trust and to compel defendant to convey the legal title to real estate to the plaintiffs as heirs at law of Janes. On his death his title, then an equity,passed to the heirs, as was held in the cases last cited; and unless it can be maintained, which we think cannot be done, that the administrator is entitled under our statute to have the title to the property conveyed to him, it would seem clear that he is not the proper party to bring this action.”

If the action be regarded as one brought under section 1589 of the Code of Civil Procedure to set aside a fraudulent conveyance and convert the property into assets of the estate, and subject it to the payment of the creditors of the deceased—and that such is its intended character and purpose is practically conceded by respondent—then the complaint is fatally defective for want of facts, and the demurrer should have been sustained on that ground.

Section 1589 is as follows: “ When there is a deficiency of assets in the hands of an executor or administrator, and when the decedent in his lifetime has conveyed any real estate or any rights or interests therein, with intent to defraud his creditors, or to avoid any right, debt, or duty of any person, or has so conveyed such estate that by law the deeds or conveyances are void as against creditors, the executor or administrator must commence and prosecute to final judgment any proper action for the recovery of the same; and may recover for the benefit of the creditor all such real estate so fraudulently conveyed, and may also, for the benefit of the creditor, sue and recover all goods, chat

Field v. Andrada

AI Brief

Synopsis

More from California Supreme Court

Related research

AI Brief