What is quiet title?

Useful Rulings on Quiet Title

Recent Rulings on Quiet Title

ANTHONY SAM VS RENEE KWAN ET AL

The causes of action in the FAC include (1) breach of fiduciary duty; (2) breach of contract; (3) quiet title/cancellation of instrument; (4) breach of covenant of good faith and fair dealing; (5) violations of Business and Professions Code sections 12700 et seq.; (6) escrow negligence; (7) fraud; (8) civil conspiracy; and (9) declaratory relief.

  • Hearing

    Jul 29, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

HOMAYOUN LARIAN VS EDWARD CZUKER, ET AL.

Third Cause of Action: Quiet Title An action for quiet title seeks “to establish title against adverse claims to real or personal property or any interest therein.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 760.020, subd. (a).)

  • Hearing

    Jul 26, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

MELODY CHACKER VS SELECT PORTFOLIO SERVICING, AN ARIZONA CORPORATION DOING BUSINESS IN CALIFORNIA, ET AL.

.), alleging: (1) intentional misrepresentation; (2) violation of California Civil Code section 2923.5; (3) negligent misrepresentation; (4) violation of California Civil Code section 2924.17; (5) quiet title; and (6) declaratory and injunctive relief. On December 9, 2019, Plaintiff filed a substitution of attorney. Defendants SPS, U.S. Bank N.A., and NDSC (collectively, Defendants) now move for Plaintiff to be declared a vexatious litigant.

  • Hearing

    Jul 15, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Foreclosure

ANTONE NINO AND NASRIN SHAKERI NINO, A PARTNERSHIP VS NASRIN SHAKERI NINO, INDIVIDUALLY, AND AS GENERAL PARTNER, ETC., ET AL.

title to real and personal property; and (9) the partition and sale of real property as between tenants in common, and for accounting of rents, issues of profits.

  • Hearing

    Jul 13, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

RAYMOND VILLAGE, LLC V. HILL RANCH PARTNERSHIP

Hill Ranch further alleges that Raymond Village’s allegation in its own Complaint about the dispute over the easement is false and made solely to enable Raymond Village to assert quiet title and file a lis pendens that impedes the sale of the Hill Ranch property. [Cross-Complaint, ¶¶ 12-14.] These are the interfering and wrongful acts relied on by Hill Ranch for its interference and unfair business practices claims. [Cross-Complaint, ¶¶ 17, 24, 31, 36.]

  • Hearing

    Jul 13, 2020

ANTONE NINO AND NASRIN SHAKERI NINO, A PARTNERSHIP VS NASRIN SHAKERI NINO, INDIVIDUALLY, AND AS GENERAL PARTNER, ETC., ET AL.

title to real and personal property; and (9) the partition and sale of real property as between tenants in common, and for accounting of rents, issues of profits.

  • Hearing

    Jul 13, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

RICHARD WEGER ET AL VS MARY ALICE MEDINA

The causes of action in the complaint are: 1) quiet title to easement, 2) declaratory relief, 3) interference with easement, 4) cancellation and expungement of instrument, and 5) breach of contract. On February 3, 2020, Medina answered the complaint and filed a cross-complaint (“CC”) against Weger/Dagg.

  • Hearing

    Jul 10, 2020

  • Judge Donna Geck
  • County

    Santa Barbara County, CA

ADAMS ANTIOCH WAREHOUSE VS. JASON WALKER

Plaintiff filed this action for declaratory relief, quiet title, and injunction. Demurrer The City demurs to the First (Declaratory Relief) and Second (Quiet Title) Causes of Action on the ground the claims are untimely as a matter of law and therefore barred by the applicable statutes of limitations. Both parties’ arguments on this demurrer are directed at plaintiff’s first cause of action, which attacks the legality of the City’s 2001 vacation.

  • Hearing

    Jul 10, 2020

ANDREW M. EGBE VS SELECT PORTFOLIO SERVICING, INC., ET AL.

In his third cause of action for quiet title, Plaintiff seeks quiet title to the Property based on the legal theories articulated ante. In his fourth cause of action for declaratory relief, Plaintiff seeks a judicial determination that Defendants have no interest in the Property based on the aforementioned legal disputes. In his fifth cause of action for slander of title, Plaintiff alleges that Defendants’ recording of various documents has disparaged his title to the Property.

  • Hearing

    Jul 10, 2020

HEE WOO LEE VS PATRICK IN HWAN CHOI

Plaintiff’s quiet title and cancellation of conveyance causes of action requests that the Court reconvey the Property back to Plaintiff. (Prayer of Complaint ¶3.) In addition, Plaintiff submitted evidence that the property at issue in this action is located in San Bernardino County, and that Plaintiff seeks to remove the Deed of Trust recorded by Defendant on November 8, 2017 as to the Property. (Supp-Decl. of Lee ¶2; Decl. of Song ¶7.)

  • Hearing

    Jul 10, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

JOHN MANOS VS WASHINGTON MUTUAL BANK, F.A., ET AL.

C), a Second District Court of Appeal opinion affirming dismissal of Plaintiff’s action for quiet title which was brought on the basis that the foreclosing Defendants lacked authority to foreclose (Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. LC100870 and Court of Appeal Case No. B255468) (Make It Nice, Req. for Judicial Notice, Exs.

  • Hearing

    Jul 10, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

DANNIEL MADRID VS CANDACE HOWELL

Rosenstiel and the ABG had participated in a quiet title action (Case No. BC615215) where judgment was rendered in Rosenstiel’s favor, and he filed an eviction action against the Zielkes and ABG (Case No. 16U08017). Rosenstiel thereafter granted possessory interest in the property to Plaintiff on April 1, 2017, but on November 17, 2018, the Zielkes entered into a written lease with Defendant Candace Howell (“Defendant”).

  • Hearing

    Jul 10, 2020

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

GOGA PROPERTIES LLC VS AMY RAFTI ET AL

On May 31, 2017, GOGA filed this action to quiet title as to Amy Rafti’s adverse claims, as well as seeking damages for her trespass and an order of ejectment to cease her occupation, possession and use of the Subject Property. (DUMF 18.) From these undisputed facts[1], NATIC argues that Exception 2 of the Title Insurance Policy applies to except GOGA’s insurance claim.

  • Hearing

    Jul 10, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Quiet Title

ANDRANIK AVEDYAN VS ALIS AVEDYAN, AN INDIVIDUAL, ET AL.

Specifically, the prayer seeks to quiet title reverting title to the subject property exclusively into the names of plaintiff and nominal defendant Nshan Auvazyan, to quiet title preventing defendant Alis Avedyan from asserting any ownership or other interest against the interest of the nominal defendant, for quiet title preventing defendant Garnick Kashishian from asserting any ownership or other interest against the interest of the nominal defendant, and for a determination of rights of defendants Alis Avedyan

  • Hearing

    Jul 10, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Quiet Title

FIONA DEARING, ET AL. VS PENTAGON FEDERAL CREDIT UNION, ET AL.

As previously stated Plaintiff’s verified complaint is for quiet title, cancellation of instruments, declaratory relief, and injunctive relief. Quiet Title To state a claim for quiet title, Plaintiff must (1) include a description of the property; (2) Plaintiff’s title or interest and the basis; (3) defendant’s asserting adverse claim or antagonistic property interest; (4) date as of which the determination is sought; and (5) prayer for determination of title. (Code Civ. Proc., § 761.020; see Lucas v.

  • Hearing

    Jul 09, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Quiet Title

ROSEMARY WOODS VS RAZ INVESTMENTS,INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, ET AL.

[The Court notes Raz Defendants also argue that Plaintiff fails to allege facts to support a cause of action against Yanni; however, the quiet title cause of action is not asserted against Yanni.] Plaintiff failed to allege sufficient facts to constitute the quiet title cause of action against RII. Plaintiff alleged no facts suggesting RII claims an interest in the Florence Property adverse to Plaintiff’s claim that would entitle Plaintiff to maintain a quiet title cause of action against RII.

  • Hearing

    Jul 09, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Quiet Title

MICHAEL M. RUBEY VS MITCHELL

Plaintiff filed this lawsuit in April 2019 alleging causes of action for cancellation of deed and for quiet title against defendants Xavier Mitchell and Adrian Sinay (collectively, Defendants). Essentially, by way of the Complaint, Plaintiff sought to set aside an allegedly fraudulent deed that was clouding the title to his property, which was located at 415 Flores de Oro, Rancho Santa Fe, California (Property).

  • Hearing

    Jul 09, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

REGENCY LAND DEVELOPMENT LLC ET AL VS JEWISH EDUCATIONAL MOV

.: BC710606 Hearing Date: July 9, 2020 [TENTATIVE] order RE: plaintiff Andrew Wolf’s motion for trial prefErence Background Plaintiffs Regency Land Development LLC (“Regency”), Andrew Wolf (“Wolf”), and David Perry (“Plaintiff Perry”) (jointly “Plaintiffs”) filed this action on June 18, 2019, against Defendants Jewish Educational Movement (“JEM”) and Hertzel Illulian (“Illulian”) (jointly, “Defendants”) for (1) Quiet Title; (2) Breach Of Oral Contract; (3) Fraud; (4) Conversion; (5) Elder Abuse (6) Declaratory

  • Hearing

    Jul 09, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Quiet Title

  • Judge Elaine Lu
  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

FRANK X. ENDERLE, JR., TRUSTEE OF THE AUGUSTINE H. ENDERLE TRUST, ET AL. VS OAKWOOD CEMETERY ASSOCIATION, OF LOS ANGELES, A NON-PROFIT CORPORATION, ET AL.

Plaintiffs/Cross-Defendants now move to strike and demurrer to the First Amended Cross-Complaint which contains causes of action for: (1) Offset Against Amounts Owing to Heirs and Successors In Interest to Interested Directors of Public Benefit Corporation for Self-Dealing Transaction (Corporations Code 5233(f)) and (2) Quiet Title to Personal Property (CCP 760.020).

  • Hearing

    Jul 09, 2020

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

FELICIA JACINTA ANARO VS MASON-MCDUFFIE MORTGAGE CORPORATION AND U.S. BANK, N.A. ET AL.

Quiet Title: Plaintiff’s complaint is verified, but does not identify the date as of which she seeks a judicial determination of quiet title. More importantly, plaintiff does not allege that she tendered the amount she owes her lender. She must tender the amount due in order to obtain a decree of quiet title. Miller v. Provost (1994) 26 Cal.App.4th 1703, 1707; Leuras v. BAC Home Loans Servicing, LP (2013) 221 Cal.App.4th 49, 86–87.

  • Hearing

    Jul 08, 2020

  • Judge

    George J. Abdallah

  • County

    San Joaquin County, CA

CREEKSIDE VILLAGE (AOF) LLC V. 518 AVENUE OF THE FLAGS, LLC.

Nature of Proceedings: Case Management Conference Quiet title (easement) issue. Request for Default (certain named defendants) submitted 6/29/20 – not processed/ discuss. Status of case/ dispute.

  • Hearing

    Jul 07, 2020

CLAUDETTE MARIE LESLIE, ET AL. VS NEW CENTURY MORTGAGE CORPORATION, ET AL.

Plaintiffs contend that their lis pendens notice was “served upon defendants contemporaneously with Plaintiffs summons and complaint for quiet title.” (Opposition at p. 4.) But there is no evidence of such service included in the opposition, or in the proofs of service within the court’s file for this case. Nor has this court approved the filing of such a notice as required of pro per parties under Code of Civil Procedure § 405.21.

  • Hearing

    Jul 07, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Foreclosure

ALEJANDRO RAMIREZ, ET AL. VS DOUGLAS WHITNEY

Plaintiffs Alejandro and Teresa show a reasonable probability of prevailing on the quiet title claim, sufficient for the court to consider the balance of harms. Because Plaintiffs Alejandro and Teresa show a reasonable probability of prevailing on the quiet title claim, the court need not resolve whether any Plaintiffs have shown a likelihood of success on a fraud claim against Defendant.

  • Hearing

    Jul 07, 2020

MACK BROWN VS WESTERN PROGRESSIVE, ET AL.

Quiet Title 8. Unfair Business Practices (B&P section 17200 et seq.) 9. Cancellation of Instruments 10. Slander of Title 11. Declaratory Relief 12. Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress 13. Constructive Fraud Defendants concurrently move to strike all prayers for punitive damages and associated allegations. SUMMARY OF ALLEGATIONS The complaint is replete with unsupported legal conclusions which the court does not deem true even on demurrer.

  • Hearing

    Jul 07, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Foreclosure

FERNANDO HERNANDEZ VS GEORGE "FRANK" ALVAREZ

., All Persons Unknown, Claiming Any Legal or Equitable Right, Title, Estate, Lien, or Interest in the Property Described in the Complaint Adverse to Plaintiffs’ Title or Any Cloud on Plaintiffs’ Title Thereto and Does 1-20 for: Quiet Title Breach of Contract Breach of the Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing Breach of Fiduciary Duty Negligent Misrepresentation Fraud Money Had and Received/Unjust Enrichment On July 31, 2018, the court sustained Alvarez’s demurrer to the third cause of action in the

  • Hearing

    Jul 07, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 153     last » 

For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.

Please wait a moment while we gather your results.