Dacey v. Taraday
126 Cal. Rptr. 3d 804
Cal. Ct. App.2011Background
- GB&G dissolved in 1990; flood cases assigned to Goldstein under dissolution agreement and Exhibit 5 terms allocated portions of contingent fees.
- Goldstein died in 2001; flood case settlement occurred in 2004, generating a large fee recovery; Taraday as estate administrator settled with Desmond in 2005–2006, boosting Desmond’s share.
- Dacey did not file a creditor’s claim; Taraday paid others; Dacey sued for breach of contract, rescission, and torts against various parties.
- Lower court ruled the statute of limitations under CCP 366.2 did not apply to the estate breach claim and that the dissolution agreement assigned the flood cases to Goldstein; bifurcated bench trial followed, with findings favorable to Dacey on breach claim against the estate.
- Phase I concluded the flood cases were not GB&G assets but were assigned to Goldstein; Phase II addressed other claims; the court awarded Dacey damages and prejudgment interest; Desmond and others prevailed on some counts on appeal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Did the dissolution agreement assign flood cases to Goldstein? | Dacey: flood cases remained GB&G partnership asset. | Estate/Desmond: flood cases assigned to Goldstein under agreement. | Flood cases assigned to Goldstein; Dacey’s view rejected. |
| Does CCP 366.2 bar Dacey’s breach claim? | Dacey: death of Goldstein does not bar; liability survives. | Estate: liability personal to decedent; 366.2 applies. | 366.2 does not apply; breach occurred after death and was not a pre-death debt. |
| Was the creditor’s claim filing requirement preserved on appeal? | Dacey: not necessary to plead; estoppel not waived. | Estate: issue preserved as independent defense. | Estate waived preservation; issue not preserved for appeal as independent basis. |
| Why prejudgment interest awarded at 10%? | Interest should accrue from breach. | Probate Code controls; interest may differ. | Interest accrues at 10% from breach under Civil Code 3289(b); Probate Code harmonized. |
Key Cases Cited
- Estate of Yool, 151 Cal.App.4th 867 (Cal. Ct. App. 2007) (366.2 applies only to actions against decedent that survive death; not accrued requires pre-death misconduct or liability)
- Ferraro v. Camarlinghi, 161 Cal.App.4th 509 (Cal. Ct. App. 2008) (interprets ‘not accrued’ under 366.2 to align with post-death damages rules)
- Bradley v. Breen, 73 Cal.App.4th 798 (Cal. Ct. App. 1999) (discusses application of 366.2 to post-death actions in certain contexts)
- Wagner v. Wagner, 162 Cal.App.4th 249 (Cal. Ct. App. 2008) (discusses broad application of 366.2 to claims surviving decedent’s death)