Dimock

Dimock v. Emerald Properties LLC

Caution
2000 Cal. App. LEXIS 491·2000 Daily Journal DAR 6653·81 Cal. App. 4th 868·97 Cal. Rptr. 2d 255·2000 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 5010
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 21, 2000D032454California3,828 words

Opinion

Opinion

Benke, J.

By statute the Legislature has permitted the beneficiary of a deed of trust to substitute, at any time, a new trustee for the existing trustee. Under the governing statute the substitution is made by simply recording a document evidencing the substitution. (Civ. Code, § 2934a, subd. (a).) By its terms the statute provides that after such a substitution has been recorded, “the new trustee shall succeed to all the powers, duties, authority, and title granted and delegated to the trustee named in the deed of trust.” (§ 2934a, subd. (a)(4).)

Other than by recording a further substitution there are no other statutory means by which the effect of a substitution, once recorded, may be avoided. Moreover, notwithstanding the arguments of respondents, we are not disposed to create any nonstatutory means of doing so on the record presented here.

Because the respondent beneficiary in this case recorded a substitution of trustee, thereafter only the substituted trustee had the power to sell the trustor’s property at a foreclosure sale. Thus a later sale by the prior trustee was void. Accordingly we must reverse a judgment entered in favor of the respondents and direct that a…

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.