Legal Question in Real Estate Law in California

Re: Title, deed, will

The question, as posed, doesn't make a lot of sense, so let me try my best to answer it.

Are you saying that the title was never in the parents' names? You say that the title "and credit" were "applied" in the childrens' names. Not sure what that means. One doesn't "apply" for title. One is granted title. By "credit", I assume you mean that the children are the responsible parties on the mortgage.

At any rate, if the parents are not on title, then the parents had nothing to "will" away.

If A, B and C are on title, then they are the owners. Either would have a right to partition, however, and in an action for partition, the court would apportion and/or adjust each owner's share of the proceeds, according to each owner's contributions to the property.

This can be a complicated area of the law. Partition actions should be handled by an attorney.

Good luck.

***No Legal Services or Attorney Client Relationship - Although this email may provide information concerning potential legal issues, it is not a substitute for legal advice from qualified counsel. You should not and are not authorized to rely on this email as a source of legal advice. Until a formal Retainer Agreement is executed, any communication between you and The Guerrini Law Firm cannot create any attorney-client relationship between you and The Guerrini Law Firm.***

Re: Title, deed, will

Your facts are not clearly stated. Here's how I interpret them:

In 1977, A, B and C, who are siblings, purchased a house as cotenants (probably as tenants in common, but possibly as joint tenants), using money provided to them by their parents as a down payment. It looks as though you're saying that A, a daughter, got her share of the down-payment money as a gift from her father; that B, a son, got his share from mom (married at the time to father); and that C, another daughter, was placed on title but didn't receive any gift of money and therefore didn't participate in making the down payment, perhaps because she was a minor at the time.

If these facts are correct (and that's a big IF), I would say--

#1 - Parents had no right to will the property;

#2 - The rights of A, B and C will depend on what is shown on the public records at the County Recorder's office. If A is "on the deed," i.e., shown as a co-owner, that will probably stand up in court. Same for B and C.

#3. Ownership is PROBABLY as shown in the public records. Recorded deeds, as reflected in the records of the County Recorder, are presumed to show ownership of legal title. Sometimes, the presumption raised by recorded deeds can be rebutted. One example is adverse possession, where legal ownership can be obtained against the owner of record through five years of possession without the owner's consent, payment of all taxes, and other requirements, but that probably isn't an issue here. Another possibility arises when X pays for the property but Y gets legal title and X didn't intend a gift -- this gives rise to a "resulting trust" -- but that probably didn't happen here, either, since the record ownership is probably what everyone had in mind at the time (in 1977).

My answer won't be correct if my interpretation of your facts is wrong. Please feel free to e-mail me to give additional information at [email protected].