Knox v. Associated Investments CA2/6

Filed 3/7/13 Knox v. Associated Investments CA2/6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION SIX

JOHN MICHAEL KNOX, 2d Civil No. B238123 (Super. Ct. No. 1382793) Plaintiff, Cross-defendant and (Santa Barbara County) Appellant,

v.

ASSOCIATED INVESTMENTS et al.,

Defendants and Respondents,

ROBERT MOORE,

Defendant, Cross-complainant and Respondent.

John Michael Knox appeals from a judgment dismissing his complaint for adverse possession and quieting title to the subject property in favor of respondent Robert Moore, as the principal of respondent Associated Investments. Knox's admitted failure to pay the property taxes defeats his claim for adverse possession, and he has no other demonstrable claim to the property. We affirm. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND Angel Kostov and Moore, a real estate broker, formed a business partnership known as Associated Investments. In 1980, Associated Investments took title to a single-family residence located at 1111 Via Chaparral, Santa Barbara, California

(Property). Kostov later withdrew from Associated Investments and Moore's wife assumed Kostov's partnership interest. After his wife's death in 2006, Moore continued doing business as Associated Investments. Under circumstances that are far from clear, Knox and his family moved into the Property in 2002, purportedly for "a short time, probably less than 60 days." Knox did not sign a lease or pay any rent. Moore claims he occasionally asked Knox to pay rent or move out, but Knox rebuffed these requests, saying he would "work it off" through home improvements. Moore, who is 85, suffers from memory loss and dementia. In 2011, Moore's daughter, Heidi Knightstep, moved in with her father and started assisting him with his properties and financial affairs. Moore told her that "the person that had moved [into the Property] a while back still hasn't left and has not paid any rent, and [I] can't seem to get him out." After receiving a formal eviction notice, Knox filed a complaint in pro per alleging adverse possession against Associated Investments. Moore retained an attorney, who appeared on behalf of both Associated Investments and Moore. Associated Investments demurred to the complaint based on Knox's failure to allege payment of the property taxes -- a required element of adverse possession. The trial court sustained the demurrer on that basis, granted leave to amend and denied Knox's motion to strike Associated Investments' pleadings based on lack of standing. When Knox failed to amend the complaint within the allotted time period, the trial court dismissed the complaint. Moore filed a cross-complaint against Knox to quiet title to the Property. Knox did not answer the cross-complaint, and the trial court entered his default. At the default prove-up hearing, Moore's daughter provided testimony and documentary evidence showing Moore owns the Property through Associated Investments, has paid the property taxes and is entitled to possession. The trial court permitted Knox to participate in the hearing, but Knox did not ask any questions or offer any testimony or evidence of his own. He simply stated his intent to appeal. The trial court granted Moore's request for a default judgment, explaining: "I've taken the testimony of Miss Knightstep. She's