Ramirez v. Ramirez
198 Cal. App. 4th 336
| Cal. Ct. App. | 2011Background
- Rand appeals a family court order requiring her to sign a reconveyance related to a FLARPL recorded against Delia Ramirez's Donax Avenue property.
- The FLARPL was created in 2006 to secure attorney fees for Rand in the dissolution action; notice and service procedures were at issue.
- The September 3, 2009 order vacating the FLARPL was entered without Rand's joinder or notice, later deemed void for lack of notice to Rand's client or her firm.
- Rand sought joinder and a declaratory judgment that the 2009 order was void, asserting she was an indispensable party with a status as lienholder.
- Judge Rubin joined Rand as a party in 2010 and directed a reconveyance, but Rand argued she should not be compelled to relinquish the FLARPL without proper joinder and notice.
- The court on appeal reverses the 2010 order to vacate the FLARPL but affirms the joinder; remands for a new proceeding on the FLARPL issue.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was Rand an indispensable party requiring joinder before vacatur of the FLARPL? | Rand contends she was indispensable and not joined or noticed. | The court could adjudicate FLARPL without Rand's joinder. | Yes; Rand was indispensable and lacked joinder or notice. |
| Did lack of joinder/notice render the September 3, 2009 order void as to Rand? | The order cannot bind Rand because she was not properly joined or served. | The order may stand; Rand’s interests will be protected on remand. | The 2009 order is void as to Rand for lack of joinder and notice. |
| Should Rand be compelled to relinquish the FLARPL based on the void 2009 order? | Requisition to reconvey should be void absent proper joinder. | If joinder is later accomplished, reconveyance may be appropriate. | Reversed to the extent requiring relinquishment; remand for new FLARPL proceedings. |
Key Cases Cited
- Castle v. Schulman, 32 Cal.2d 222 (1948) (lienholder rights not extinguished absent joinder)
- Fraser-Yamor Agency, Inc. v. County of Del Norte, 68 Cal.App.3d 201 (1977) (indispensable party jurisdictional defect when not joined)
- Estate of Reed, 259 Cal.App.2d 14 (1968) (judgment void without indispensable party)
- Lezine v. Security Pacific Fin. Servs., Inc., 14 Cal.4th 56 (1996) (lien priority and property division; lien satisfaction liability)
- Washington Mutual Bank v. Blechman, 157 Cal.App.4th 662 (2007) (indispensable party concept; joinder concepts in litigation)