Robertson

Robertson v. Superior Court

Good Law
109 Cal. Rptr. 2d 650·2001 Cal. App. LEXIS 577·2001 Daily Journal DAR 7727·90 Cal. App. 4th 1319·2001 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 6323
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 25, 2001No. A093924California4,117 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Haerle, J.

*1321 Opinion

I. Introduction

Petitioner Arlene Robertson (Robertson) seeks a writ of mandate to overturn an order of the trial court overruling her demurrer to real party’s second amended complaint. That complaint implicated title to real property, including Robertson’s home, in Marin County, and her demurrer was based on statute of limitations grounds. In overruling it, the trial court held that an action under Civil Code section 3412 to cancel “a wholly void instrument can be brought at any time,” i.e., is not subject to any statute of limitations. We issued an order to show cause and, after briefing and oral argument, now grant the petition.

II. Factual and Procedural Background

According to the allegations of both the first and second amended complaints filed in this action, in 1949 Inez Brooks, now deceased, executed a quitclaim deed to approximately 35 acres of real property in the Muir Beach area of Marin County to her husband, Charles Brooks, now also deceased. That quitclaim deed was apparently part of a divorce settlement between the couple.

Charles Brooks apparently remarried and thereafter sold off parcels or portions of the land conveyed to him by the quitclaim…

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.