Legal Question in Real Estate Law in California

A "purchase-money resulting trust" is not a document you sign. It is a legal relationship that arises when, for example, X buys property with Y's money. Here's an example: Rockefeller hears that oil has been discovered in Texas, so he sends his loyal assistant, Cratchit, to Texas with a satchel full of Rockefeller's money. Upon arrival in Texas, Cratchit buys several ranches with the money, but neglects to have Rockefeller's name put on the deeds; instead, he has the newly-acquired properties put in his own name. When Rockefeller hears about this, he goes to court. The facts show that Cratchit didn't have criminal intent, but merely acted mistakenly. The court finds that Cratchit owns the property in name only, and that holding is in trust for Rockefeller, and that Cratchit must convey the property to Rockefeller upon Rockefeller's request. The trust created by Cratchit's mis-handling of the purchase is called a "purchase-money resulting trust." In that phrase, the term "resulting" has a somewhat special meaning, something like "jumping back," i.e., meaning that the trust was created at the moment of the defective transaction, and not later on, as when the judge declares its existence. To get to the essence of your question, I'd say the document-drafting was somewhat sloppy, but that doesn't make it fraudulent or ineffective. I can't say this deal was entirely legal, but neither can I say the mistakes and other facts you point out show that it was fraudulent or that it could be set aside by a court. Finally, as to notaries and thumbprints, the relevant law is Government Code section 8206, subpart (a)(2)(G). This law is for the regulation of notaries, and in my opinion the failure of a notary to obtain a thumbprint does not affect the legal validity of the document he/she has notarized, nor the ability to record it.

While I agree with Mr. Whipple, especially that a "resulting trust" has ZERO to do with your mother or this transaction you describe, I have a much more fundamental question: what do you or your mother care? The address is wrong on all three documents because a title company puts the address into their system once for each escrow and any typo gets printed in every document that is printed for the transaction. If the legal description is correct and is the property the parties intended to buy/sell, then there is zero relevance to the typo. But again, what do you care? Do you contend the husband did not actually sell the property? Do you contend that the buyers did not actually buy and pay for it? You say "would a thumb print from the journal of records resolve THIS mystery?" but what is THIS mystery? You haven't described any mystery. Husband sold property to a buyer who bought it with a loan secured by a deed of trust. Buyer then deeded it to his son. So what? That is not a mystery or even a legal question of any kind.