Reynolds v. Palmbaum CA3

Filed 11/9/23 Reynolds v. Palmbaum CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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) ----

TRACI REYNOLDS, Individually and as Trustee, C096587 etc., et al., (Super. Ct. No. 34-2017- Plaintiffs, Cross-defendants and 00217076-CU-OR-GDS) Respondents,

v.

BRUCE PALMBAUM et al.

Defendants, Cross-complainants and Appellants.

Hoping to enforce a 2017 civil judgment against Edward Freidberg, Bruce Palmbaum and others (appellants) sought to establish that Freidberg’s 2017 transfer of property to his wife Traci Reynolds was fraudulent and voidable. After appellants presented their evidence in a court trial, the trial court issued a statement of decision

1

granting the motion for judgment made by respondents Freidberg and Reynolds, finding the 2017 transfer was made in good faith based on a preexisting obligation. Appellants now contend the trial court erred because there was not substantial evidence supporting the trial court’s findings. We agree with respondents that appellants’ claim is forfeited because they have not set forth all the material evidence in their opening brief. Accordingly, we affirm. BACKGROUND Due to the nature of the contention raised on appeal, we need not recite all of the facts underlying the disputes between the parties here. The following limited background will suffice. Before they married in the late 1980’s, Reynolds and Freidberg signed a premarital agreement that provided, inter alia: (1) their separate earnings during the marriage would be separate property, (2) Freidberg would pay for joint living expenses from his separate property, and (3) Reynolds would receive annual lump sum cash transfers from Freidberg after each year of marriage. In 1992, Reynolds started loaning money to Freidberg. To secure those loans, Freidberg executed and recorded a deed of trust to Reynolds encumbering his interest in the Sacramento residence they owned together (the property). At least twice between 2002 and 2007, a deed of trust was removed to facilitate refinancing of the home and then put back on the property after the refinance. But after a 2007 refinance, a deed of trust was not put back. Believing the deed of trust had been put back on the property, Reynolds continued loaning money to Freidberg through at least 2017, when he owed her a total of about $1 million. In 2016, Palmbaum obtained an arbitration award against Freidberg totaling approximately $360,000. In 2017, Palmbaum petitioned the trial court to enter judgment against Freidberg in accordance with that arbitration award. The day before the trial court entered the requested judgment, Freidberg recorded a deed of trust on the property