Legal Question in Real Estate Law in California

What is the question?

I guess you are saying there is a discrepancy between the way title is held and the way you think it should be held. Title to property is taken and recorded (generally, at least) in the form requested by the grantee at the time of acquisition. A woman who buys or inherits a house while she is single will take title as an unmarried woman. If she marries later on, it is unnecessary to file or record any papers changing the way title is held. It can be done, but usually isn't, and failure to do so is not improper in any way.

If, however, a married woman acquires a house and takes title in her own name alone, which she may do if she acquires it as a gift, by inheritance, or with her separate money, she should take title as "Jane Doe, a married woman, as her separate property" or words to that effect.

Taking title using a description of yourself that is not correct at the time is not lawful and might be criminal (under Penal Code section 115.5 covering recording of false documents and making false statements to notaries), or could be a harmless mistake if not intended to deceive anyone and/or the "miss-description" was the grantor's or the title company's error.

So, what you've discovered may be no problem at all, a harmless mistake, an unintentional but potentially misleading and damaging error, or a deliberate attempt to defraud, or somewhere in between. Whatever the situation, if it needs to be remedied, there would be a legal process to get it fixed, but you'll have to give us more information.