Vaughan v. Heer CA3

Filed 10/3/23 Vaughan v. Heer CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Sacramento) ----

GITTA VAUGHAN, as Trustee, etc., C095969

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 34201400171630PRTRFRC) v.

RANDHIR HEER et al.,

Defendants and Appellants.

Appellants Randhir Heer and Dominique G. Engel appeal from two trial court orders, one denying a motion to disqualify the judge pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 170.6 and the other approving a trustee’s accounting following the court-ordered sale of real property. As to the first, we conclude we lack the power to review on appeal a ruling on a disqualification motion. As to the second, because appellants have failed to present reasoned argument with citations to the record and legal authority, we conclude appellants have forfeited the appeal of this order. We affirm.

1

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND We provide limited background from the incomplete record provided and from the facts agreed to in the parties’ briefs. (See Artal v. Allen (2003) 111 Cal.App.4th 273, 274; see generally 9 Witkin, Cal. Procedure (6th ed. 2023) Appeal, § 355.) Petitioner and respondent Gitta Vaughan serves as trustee of the Christian Engel 2004 Revocable Trust. The trust owns half a piece of real property, and the other half was owned at the outset of the case by Engel. Vaughan petitioned the probate court to partition the property by sale, which the court granted in 2015. Engel then gifted her interest in the property to Heer, which the court considered a conspiracy to avoid the court’s order. The court then issued an order requiring Heer as the new owner to cooperate in the partition sale and to pay the additional expenses caused by the transfer, including over $43,000 in attorney fees. In 2019, the probate court appointed an elisor to sign documents on Heer’s behalf to effectuate the sale of the property. Also in 2019, despite an injunction prohibiting Heer from transferring the property without the court’s permission, Heer transferred his interest in the property. The court ordered that grant deed cancelled and ordered Heer to pay almost $6,000 in additional attorney fees. Vaughan then discovered a correction necessary to the deed granting Engel’s share of the property to Heer. In July 2021, the trial court, specifically Judge Dhillon, granted Vaughan’s motion to appoint an elisor for Engel to execute a corrected grant deed. After the property sold, Vaughan set a hearing to approve her accounting from the sale and the allocation of fees, costs, and proceeds between the trust beneficiaries and Heer. In January 2022, the probate court continued the hearing to permit appellants to