What is quiet title?

Useful Resources for Quiet Title

Rulings on Quiet Title

1-25 of 4415 results

SIERRA SPRINGS OWNERS ASSOC. V. SHAREHOLDERS REAL ESTATE

Quiet Title Prove Up Hearing. Plaintiff filed an action to quiet title to certain real property by means of implied dedication and adverse possession. Default was entered on March 8, 2018. There is an absolute ban on entry of a default judgment in quiet title actions and the traditional default prove-up procedure does not apply.

  • Hearing

    Apr 26, 2018

ANGI V. THE TESTATE AND INTESTATE SUCCESSORS OF ADAM LOHRY

There is an absolute ban on entry of a default judgment in quiet title actions and the traditional default prove-up procedure does not apply. “Section 764.010—the quiet title provision that prohibits judgments by default—contains no language limiting its applicability to a nonappearing defendant.

  • Hearing

    Oct 25, 2019

SMITH V. SMITH

There is an absolute ban on entry of a default judgment in quiet title actions and the traditional default prove-up procedure does not apply. Even where a defendant is defaulted in a quiet title action, the plaintiff is not automatically entitled to judgment in his or her favor but must prove his or her case in an evidentiary hearing with live witnesses and any other admissible evidence. (Nickell v. Matlock (2012) 206 Cal.App.4th 934, 945-947.) ““[A] quiet title judgment requires a hearing in open court.

  • Hearing

    Apr 19, 2018

BROOKS V. VAN BUREN

Plaintiff filed a complaint asserting causes of action for adverse possession, reformation of deed and to quiet title to certain real property. On July 12, 2017 default was entered against defendants Van Buren and all persons claiming a legal or equitable right, title, estate, lien, or interest in the subject property that is adverse to plaintiff’s title. ““[A] quiet title judgment requires a hearing in open court.

  • Hearing

    Nov 16, 2017

BROOKS V. VAN BUREN

Plaintiff filed a complaint asserting causes of action for adverse possession, reformation of deed and to quiet title to certain real property. On July 12, 2017 default was entered against defendants Van Buren and all persons claiming a legal or equitable right, title, estate, lien, or interest in the subject property that is adverse to plaintiff’s title. ““[A] quiet title judgment requires a hearing in open court.

  • Hearing

    Oct 05, 2017

THE SAN GABRIEL 2016 TRUST ET AL VS BM SQUARED LLC ET AL

This is an action for quiet title and declaratory relief, as well as breach of contract and fraudulent conveyance. The court is without power to grant default judgment on the quiet title cause of action without an evidentiary hearing. Code of Civil Procedure § 764.010 provides as to quiet title actions: The court shall examine into and determine the plaintiff's title against the claims of all the defendants.

  • Hearing

    Jan 31, 2018

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Quiet Title

FRED RUIZ VS JUAN RUIZ

Every quiet title claim must allege the basis on which the quiet title plaintiff is entitled to quiet title to the subject property in himself/herself. (See Code of Civil Procedure §761.020(b); Salazar v. Thomas (2015) 236 Cal. App. 4th 467, 476 [noting that in determining the statute of limitations for quiet title claims, the courts look to the "underlying theory" or "gravamen" of the quiet title action].)

  • Hearing

    Jun 27, 2016

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

FRED RUIZ VS JUAN RUIZ

Every quiet title claim must allege the basis on which the quiet title plaintiff is entitled to quiet title to the subject property in himself/herself. (See Code of Civil Procedure §761.020(b); Salazar v. Thomas (2015) 236 Cal. App. 4th 467, 476 [noting that in determining the statute of limitations for quiet title claims, the courts look to the "underlying theory" or "gravamen" of the quiet title action].)

  • Hearing

    Jun 27, 2016

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

FRED RUIZ VS JUAN RUIZ

Every quiet title claim must allege the basis on which the quiet title plaintiff is entitled to quiet title to the subject property in himself/herself. (See Code of Civil Procedure §761.020(b); Salazar v. Thomas (2015) 236 Cal. App. 4th 467, 476 [noting that in determining the statute of limitations for quiet title claims, the courts look to the "underlying theory" or "gravamen" of the quiet title action].)

  • Hearing

    Jun 27, 2016

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

FRED RUIZ VS JUAN RUIZ

Every quiet title claim must allege the basis on which the quiet title plaintiff is entitled to quiet title to the subject property in himself/herself. (See Code of Civil Procedure §761.020(b); Salazar v. Thomas (2015) 236 Cal. App. 4th 467, 476 [noting that in determining the statute of limitations for quiet title claims, the courts look to the "underlying theory" or "gravamen" of the quiet title action].)

  • Hearing

    Jun 27, 2016

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

IN THE MATTER OF CELIA MEDINA

Here, Petitioner was the plaintiff in the quiet title action. It was his choice to not name the estate, whose claim to the property certainly existed at the time the quiet title action was filed. To hold that § 764.045(b) somehow provides an exception for the estate to assert a claim to title seems to benefit Petitioner in a manner not intended by the law. Discuss.

  • Hearing

    Feb 06, 2019

HENRY RAMIREZ VS JAMES ROJAS ET AL

The SAC accordingly alleges facts supporting a viable claim for quiet title. This ground of the motion is denied. No Allegations against GW – GW argues the SAC does not plead facts specifically pertaining to GW’s conduct. A quiet title action requires that all parties having an interest in the subject property be joined in the action. See Code Civ. Proc. § 761.020. GW’s judicially noticed documents demonstrate that it holds legal title to the property and is a proper party to the quiet title claim.

  • Hearing

    Nov 21, 2017

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Quiet Title

VAN NOORD V. KFRD, INC.

Quiet Title Cause of Action ““[A] quiet title judgment requires a hearing in open court. Although section 764.010 does not mandate oral argument—and we do not hold oral argument is necessary, though it may be helpful—the statute requires examining plaintiff's title and hearing defendant's evidence ‘in all cases.’ ...[¶] The court clearly acts as a fact finder and adjudicates issues when it determines whether to quiet title in the plaintiff....

  • Hearing

    Oct 11, 2018

SANDRA B DEMEO VS CORA PEARSON ET AL

Therefore, Plaintiff’s request for Entry of a Quiet Title Default Judgement is DENIED.

  • Hearing

    Jan 03, 2017

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Quiet Title

DANIEL M GEETING AS TRUSTEE OF THE GEETING FAMILY TRUST DATED OCTOBER 19 1998 VS. MICHAEL G VOIGHT

First, nothing in the written settlement agreement or the supplemental terms thereof authorize the Geetings to recover attorney's fees and costs incurred in the quiet title action. (See Roach Decl., Exh. 3, ¶4 [indicating only that the Geetings would file a quiet title action with respect to the strips nos. 1 through 9, and Voight would not oppose the quiet title action].)

  • Hearing

    Jun 12, 2019

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

TIERNAN VS. DIABLO COMMUNITY S

First Cause of Action for Quiet Title In their quiet title cause of action, Intervenors seek a judgment "quieting title to the Cut- Through". They request a judgment establishing "there is no recorded easement in favor of Mr.

  • Hearing

    Nov 06, 2020

FIELDING V. ELLIS

Therefore, they are not sufficient to state a cause of action for quiet title based on forfeiture. Because cross-complainants have not offered additional facts that could be alleged to cure the defect in this cause of action, the demurrer to this cause of action is sustained without leave to amend. The demurrer to the ninth cause of action for quiet title based on encroachment is overruled.

  • Hearing

    Aug 02, 2018

BRILLIANT DISGUISE LLC ET AL VS JOJO JUNIOR INVESTMENTS ET A

ANALYSIS: This is a quiet title action. Code of Civil Procedure section 764.010 prohibits default judgment in quiet title actions: “The court shall examine into and determine the plaintiff’s title against the claims of all the defendants.

  • Hearing

    Mar 28, 2018

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Quiet Title

ANNIE VOSKANIAN, ET AL. VS PATRICK ALEXANDER, ET AL.

With respect to the first cause of action for Quiet Title asserted by plaintiff Annie Voskanian, “as a general matter an action to quiet title cannot be maintained by the owner of equitable title as against the holder of legal title” absent allegations (and ultimately proof) of fraud in connection with obtaining such legal title. (Warren v. Merrill (2006) 143 Cal.App.4th 96, 113-114 & n.20; see also Lewis v.

  • Hearing

    Aug 14, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Quiet Title

DO, ET AL. V. NGUYEN, ET AL.

The demurrer to the first cause of action for Quiet Title is therefore sustained with 15 days leave to amend. Declaratory Relief Plaintiffs’ declaratory relief cause of action is based on the quiet title claim. Thus, Plaintiffs have not stated a claim because the quiet title claim is not properly alleged to show any adverse claim as to Defendant Tsasu LLC. Plaintiffs’ response to the demurrer contains no substantive opposition to Defendant’s arguments.

  • Hearing

    Feb 16, 2018

CARLOS SANTOS V. RAMONA LOPEZ

Plaintiff must also present adequate evidence to establish quiet title either by acquisition or adverse possession. Explanation: Quiet Title- Default Prove – Up: Code of Civil Procedure section 764.010 requires an evidentiary hearing in a quiet title action after default. In quiet title actions, judgment may not be entered by the normal default prove-up methods; the court must require evidence of the plaintiff's title.

  • Hearing

    Oct 16, 2017

  • Type

    Other

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A. VS. JOSE LUIS TORRES, ET AL

As discussed above in the quiet title cause of action, the pleadings adequately allege that the action was timely filed. Next, JPMorgan argues that this cause of action fails because it is merely duplicative of the quiet title action and all issues will be adjudicated in the quiet title cause of action. However, none of the cases cited by JPMorgan in support of this argument are comparable to the situation at hand, which includes an action for quiet title and declaratory relief. (See Demurrer at p.7, §F.)

  • Hearing

    Jan 04, 2019

ROBERT T PEYTON VS. AMERICAS WHOLESALE LENDER

Offner (2005) 126 Cal.App.4th 12, 24-25 [quiet title is an equitable remedy].) Plaintiffs admit they signed the deed of trust creating the mortgage on their property and that they received the proceeds of the loan. Plaintiffs would receive a windfall if they could quiet title without returning the money they admit receiving. Here: Ps have not alleged they tendered or paid the debt, and therefore the quiet title action fails. Sustain demurrer without leave to amend. Ps are suing the lender(s).

  • Hearing

    Mar 24, 2015

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE, LLC V. PORRAS

Thus, plaintiff’s quiet title claim is defectively pled, and does not constitute a valid basis for a default judgment of quiet title. While defendants have defaulted, and thus have admitted all properly pled allegations of the complaint, they are not deemed to have admitted improperly alleged claims and facts. (Vasey v. California Dance Co. (1977) 70 Cal.App.3d 742, 749.)

  • Hearing

    Sep 18, 2017

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

RIC1705555

The Complaint is not verified as required for a quiet title claim. Further, the quiet title action is uncertain as it seeks to quiet title to both the Evening Star and Red Hawk Property. However, the recorded documents demonstrate that Defendant was/is the legal title owner of the Evening Star Property as of 2006. The recorded documents directly contradict any allegation that Plaintiff and Defendant had an agreement to purchase the Evening Star Property in May, 2016.

  • Hearing

    Dec 22, 2017

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 177     last » 

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

Please wait a moment while we load this page.