Judge: Melissa R. Mccormick, Case: Thompson v. Thompson, Date: 2022-08-11 Tentative Ruling

Defendant Michael Thompson’s Demurrer to Complaint

Defendant Michael Thompson, as trustee of the Robert V. Thompson Trust dated April 11, 2012 (the 2012 Trust), demurs to plaintiff Robert Neil Thompson’s complaint.  Plaintiff’s complaint alleges three causes of action:  (i) declaratory relief; (ii) quiet title; and (iii) ejectment.  Defendant argues the statute of limitations, res judicata, and collateral estoppel bar each cause of action.  For the following reasons, defendant’s demurrer is sustained without leave to amend.

In ruling on a demurrer, a court must accept as true all allegations of fact contained in the complaint.  Blank v. Kirwan (1985) 39 Cal.3d 311, 318.  A demurrer challenges only the legal sufficiency of the affected pleading, not the truth of the factual allegations in the pleading or the pleader’s ability to prove those allegations.  Cundiff v. GTE Cal., Inc. (2002) 101 Cal.App.4th 1395, 1404-05.  Questions of fact cannot be decided on demurrer.  Berryman v. Merit Prop. Mgmt., Inc. (2007) 152 Cal.App.4th 1544, 1556.  Because a demurrer tests only the sufficiency of the complaint, a court will not consider facts that have not been alleged in the complaint unless they may be reasonably inferred from the matters alleged or are proper subjects of judicial notice.  Hall v. Great W. Bank (1991) 231 Cal.App.3d 713, 718 n.7.

This is the third lawsuit between plaintiff and defendant arising out of their deceased father’s transfer of a residence out of a preexisting trust (of which plaintiff was a beneficiary) to the 2012 Trust (of which plaintiff is not a beneficiary).  Defendant is the sole beneficiary of the 2012 Trust.  The facts underlying the lawsuits are detailed in the Court of Appeal decision affirming the dismissal on statute of limitations grounds of plaintiff’s second lawsuit.  See Thompson v. Thompson, G059770 (filed 10/12/21) (Defendant’s Request for Judicial Notice Ex. 6).

The one-year statute of limitations in California Civil Procedure Code section 366.2 also bars the instant lawsuit.  In an effort to evade the statute of limitations and the effect of the appellate court decision, plaintiff characterizes his complaint as premised on competing claims to title and possession of the residence postdating his father’s death.  Plaintiff’s causes of action, however, all rest on plaintiff’s allegation that in 2012 plaintiff’s father wrongfully transferred title to the property from himself to the 2012 Trust.  See, e.g., Complaint ¶¶ 7, 9.  That is the alleged wrong plaintiff seeks to remedy with this lawsuit.  Plaintiff’s claims that defendant wrongfully recorded property documents and wrongfully possesses the property rely on plaintiff’s contention his father wrongfully transferred the property to the 2012 Trust.  The one-year statute of limitations in section 366.2 applies to those claims, and plaintiff has not demonstrated that this deficiency could be cured by amendment.

Defendant’s unopposed request for judicial notice is granted.

Defendant to give notice and to submit a proposed judgment by August 22, 2022.

Case Management Conference

The Case Management Conference scheduled for August 11, 2022 is vacated.