Knox v. Dean II
205 Cal. App. 4th 417
Cal. Ct. App.2012Background
- Donna Knox, successor conservator for Blaine Knox, sues Dean for Elder Abuse Act claims and his cross-claim yields default judgment for Dean.
- Dean acted as Blaine’s conservator from 2003 to 2007; assets included real estate and classic cars; Blaine was elderly and with impairments.
- Accountings 2004, 2005, and 2006 were approved by the probate court; Donna did not object to the first two and objected to the third.
- Donna alleged Dean engaged in self-dealing, mismanagement, and underfunded or unnecessary services; Blaine alleged residual impairment and vulnerability to undue influence.
- Dean moved for summary judgment/adjudication arguing res judicata under Probate Code 2103 barred acts from the first three accountings; trial court granted summary judgment.
- Prosecution proceeded; the court found triable issues for the fourth accounting period and reversed to allow adjudication on fraud-related and constructive fraud-related claims.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does the Elder Abuse Act supersede Probate Code 2103? | Act supersedes 2103 to permit challenge to prior orders. | 2103 applies; Act does not alter res judicata. | Act does not supersede 2103. |
| What the extrinsic fraud standard requires to defeat res judicata under 2103? | Fraud by fiduciaries can defeat res judicata if concealed information was undiscoverable. | Extrinsic fraud not shown; 2103 requires explicit extrinsic fraud to carve out exceptions. | Extrinsic fraud required to create 2103 exception. |
| Does res judicata bar Donna's claims arising from the first three accountings? | Donna lacked notice/representation, so orders should not bar challenge. | Donna received actual notice and participated; first three orders are final. | Res judicata bars acts from first three periods; fourth period remains open. |
| Are Donna's elder financial abuse and elder physical neglect claims sufficiently pleaded? | Allegations show improper charges, self-dealing, and care deficiencies. | Pleadings lack specificity for fraud; some claims fail on sufficiency. | Elder financial abuse and elder physical neglect pleaded; some issues triable (not all dismissed). |
| Was summary judgment proper as to fraud and constructive fraud? | Certain fraud/constructive fraud theories survive; need trial. | Extrinsic fraud/constructive fraud were unsupported by specifics; grant summary adjudication. | Summary adjudication proper as to fraud and constructive fraud; remand for denial of summary judgment on those claims. |
Key Cases Cited
- Conservatorship of Berry, 210 Cal.App.3d 706 (Cal. App. Dep’t Dist. 1989) (res judicata effect of order settling accounts; exception if fraud or material misrepresentation)
- Lazzarone v. Bank of America, 181 Cal.App.3d 581 (Cal. App. Dist. 4th) (extrinsic fraud to sustain exception to res judicata under 2103)
- Bank of America v. Superior Court, 181 Cal.App.3d 705 (Cal. App. Dist. 4th) (fiduciary concealment as extrinsic fraud; applicability to guardianship matters)
- Delaney v. Baker, 20 Cal.4th 23 (Cal. 1999) (Act supersedes MICRA limits to protect vulnerable elders; contextual comparison)
- In re Margarita D., 72 Cal.App.4th 1288 (Cal. App. 2d Dist. 1999) (extrinsic fraud standard; discovery of fraud raising exception to final orders)
- Small v. Fritz Companies, Inc., 30 Cal.4th 167 (Cal. 2003) (pleading specificity requirement for fraud claims)
- Committee on Children’s Television, Inc. v. General Foods Corp., 35 Cal.3d 197 (Cal. 1983) (pleading ultimate facts, not evidentiary detail, required)
- Bank of America v. Superior Court, 181 Cal.App.3d 705 (Cal. App. Dist. 4th) (extrinsic fraud concept in guardianship context)
- Estate of Sanders, 40 Cal.3d 607 (Cal. 1985) (concealment-based fraud principles)