McGranahan

McGranahan v. Rosa

Good Law
92 F. App'x 486
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 10, 2004No. 02-17202California798 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

We reverse the conclusion of the bankruptcy appellate panel (BAP) and the bankruptcy court that a resulting trust was formed in favor of Hortencia Rosa with respect to certain real property which was owned in the name of the debtor, Dolores Garcia. “A resulting trust arises by operation of law from a transfer of property under circumstances showing that the transferee was not intended to take the beneficial interest.” Lloyds Bank of Cal. v. Wells Fargo Bank, 187 Cal. App.3d 1038, 1042 , 232 Cal.Rptr. 339 (1986) (citing Restatement (Second) of Trusts § 404) (emphasis added); In re Sale Guar. Corp., 220 B.R. 660, 664 (9th Cir.BAP1998) (same).

Both the bankruptcy judge and the BAP correctly concluded that the initial transaction between Garcia and the sellers did not create a resulting trust in favor of Rosa, because the parties clearly intended that Garcia would have the beneficial interest in the property and would ultimately repay Rosa for the down payment. Restatement (Second) of Trusts § 445 (‘Where a transfer of property is made to one person and the purchase price is advanced by another *487 as a loan to the transferee, no resulting trust arises.”). However, the…

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.