What is the statute of limitations for quieting title (on a civil case) - -specifically a quit claim deed done under coercion?

Business 3 views 2 answers
Does the statute begin from when the grant deed was recorded or when the plaintiff found out about the recording? I'm wondering since the grant deed is considered constructive notice to the world...What is the specific section of the civil code governing this? Thanks!

Attorney Answers

2
Robert Miller ·
The response of attorney Chen is correct, but does not address the issue if the plaintiff is not in possession. The date of recording is constructive notice ONLY to prospective purchasers, so that is not an issue. It is hard to understand a deed obtained from the plaintiff by coercion which would not be known immediately upon the coercion being withdrawn or removed. Under such circumstance, being founded in fraud, the 3-year statute of limitations would apply. If, on the other hand, it was not the plaintiff upon whom the coercion was practiced, but another person having standing (heir or transferee), then the date the fraud was discovered or with reasonable diligence should have been discovered will start the 3-year statute.
0 upvotes
Frank Chen ·
There is no statute of limitations governing quiet title actions as such. Rather, the statute of limitations for an action to quiet title depends on the theory of recovery. (Muktarian v. Barmby (1965) 63 Cal.2d 558, 560.) In some cases, no statute of limitations runs against a plaintiff seeking to quiet title while he is in possession of the property. An outstanding claim that amounts only to a cloud on title is a continuing cause of action and is not barred by lapse of time until the hostile claim is asserted in some manner so as to jeopardize the superior title. Accordingly, so long as the adverse claim lies dormant and inactive, the owner of the superior title may allow it to stand indefinitely. (Western Title Guaranty Co., Sacramento County Division v. Sacramento and San Joaquin Drainage Dist. (1965) 235 Cal.App.2d 815.) Where the plaintiff remains in possession of the property, the dormant adverse claim does not trigger the statute of limitations. (Smith v. Matthews (1889) 81 Cal. 120, 121; McNulty v. Copp (1949) 91 Cal.App.2d 484, 493.) http://www.attorneyqna.com/legal-guides/ugc/elements-for-a-quiet-title-complaint-in-california?ref=kb_serp_title_3
0 upvotes

People Also Asked