Duncan

Duncan v. Duncan CA1/2

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 12, 2013A134549California2,607 words

Opinion

Opinion

BACKGROUND

Plaintiff filed his first amended complaint, the operative complaint in the case, on August 20, 2007. In addition to defendant, individually and as trustee of the Henry Rodriguez 1998 Revocable Trust (the trust), the complaint also named as defendants: (1) the estate of Rodriguez; (2) Norberto Ruiz; (3) Yolanda Ruiz Nishiyama; and (4) all persons claiming a legal or equitable interest in the property. Only defendant, individually and as trustee of the trust, is a party to this appeal. We summarize the allegations made in the complaint only to the extent necessary for an understanding of plaintiff’s causes of action. Plaintiff maintained that in 1997 or 1998, the Duncans1 entered into an oral contract with defendant’s uncle, Rodriguez, whereby they promised to move into Rodriguez’s home, make repairs and improvements to the home, and care for Rodriguez, who was 84 years old and had just undergone heart bypass surgery, for the rest of his life. In return, Rodriguez promised that his home would belong to the Duncans, “equally, as their joint and/or community property” after his death. Rodriguez then transferred title to the property to the trust and designated the Duncans…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.