Bechdolt

Pay Less Drug Stores v. Bechdolt

Good Law
155 Cal. Rptr. 58·1979 Cal. App. LEXIS 1696·92 Cal. App. 3d 496
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 30, 1979Civ. 17779California1,783 words

Opinion

Opinion

Paras, J.

The issue to be determined by this appeal is whether a suit for rescission of an executed land sale contract against personal representatives of a deceased seller is a claim “arising upon contract” within the purview of Probate Code section 707, subdivision (a). With exceptions not here relevant, that section specifies that “all claims arising upon contract, whether they are due, not due, or contingent, . . . must be filed or presented within the time [4 months] limited in the notice [to creditors] ... and any claim not so filed or presented is barred forever ...

Without first filing a timely claim, plaintiff Pay Less Drug Stores (Pay Less) sued Elsie B. Bechdolt and Bank of America, NT & SA, as coexecutors of the will of Carl L. Bechdolt, deceased, and Elsie individually. The subject of the action was the sale of a parcel of land in Tahoe City by Carl and Elsie; Pay Less purchased it to build a drug store thereon, but building regulations enacted by the California Tahoe Regional Planning Agency have prevented construction. The complaint contains eight causes of action (counts), the first six seeking a judicial declaration of rescission and restitution of the $410,000…

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.