233 Cal. App. 4th 1384
Cal. Ct. App.2015Background
- The Minthorne Family Living Trust, signed 2008 by Gloria and Ralph Minthorne, names Gloria as trustee with assets including real estate later tasked into the trust.
- Section 4 required post-death distribution to a survivor’s trust with a general power of appointment, seemingly giving Gloria broad control after death.
- Section 5 outlined specific distributions to Ralph and Gloria’s family, with Adam and Heather each entitled to 12.5% of the total proceeds and other assets allocated to Ralph’s issue.
- Ralph died in 2008; Gloria's attorney informed Ralph’s children that distributions would follow section 5; Gloria began transferring assets accordingly.
- Gloria sold the Starshine and Pleasant Avenue properties and deposited proceeds to her personal account, later purchasing properties in her own name and disputing trust asset status for some properties.
- Adam filed petitions in 2010 seeking removal of Gloria as trustee, an accounting, replacement trustee, and damages; the trial court found Gloria liable and ordered reconveyance to Adam as trustee and an accounting.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the disentitlement doctrine authorizes dismissal of Gloria's appeal | Blumberg argues Gloria disobeyed orders; appeal should be dismissed. | Minthorne contends procedural safeguards or stay may excuse noncompliance. | Yes; the appeal is dismissed. |
| Whether Gloria must convey the first Hesperia property to Adam as trustee | Adam/Blumberg asserts Gloria violated orders by not transferring to Adam. | Minthorne contends discretion or stay could affect conveyance. | Gloria liable to reconvey to Adam; failure to quitclaim improper. |
| Whether Gloria’s post-trial conduct warrants continued enforcement of court orders | Adam asserts Gloria repeatedly ignored orders and misrepresented status of assets. | Gloria argues stay and other remedies should apply to her actions. | Disentitlement doctrine applies; dismissal of appeal affirmed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Stoltenberg v. Ampton Investments, Inc., 215 Cal.App.4th 1225 (Cal. Ct. App. 2013) (judgment and orders presumptively valid; disentitlement for noncompliance)
- MacPherson v. MacPherson, 13 Cal.2d 271 (Cal. 1939) (disentitlement basis for dismissal when contempts and noncompliance occur)
- Gwartz v. Weilert, 231 Cal.App.4th 750 (Cal. Ct. App. 2014) (disentitlement doctrine applied to contempt and obstruction in appeal)
- TMS, Inc. v. Aihara, 71 Cal.App.4th 377 (Cal. Ct. App. 1999) (appeal dismissal for failure to respond to postjudgment discovery))
- Stone v. Bach, 80 Cal.App.3d 442 (Cal. Ct. App. 1978) (prejudgment order and funds deposit; contempt considerations)