Fidelity & Deposit Co. of Md. v. De Strajman
| Decision Date | 11 April 1963 |
| Citation | 215 Cal.App.2d 10,29 Cal.Rptr. 855 |
| Court | California Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
| Parties | FIDELITY AND DEPOSIT COMPANY OF MARYLAND, a corporation, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. Berta G. DE STRAJMAN and Elisa S. De Hoffmann, Defendants and Respondents. Civ. 19792. |
Bohnert, Davis & McCarthy, San Francisco, for appellant.
George I. Hoffman, Lansburgh, Hoffman & Schiller, San Francisco, for respondents.
Appellant, Fidelity and Deposit Company of Marland, filed this action against the respondents to recover moneys paid to indemnify its insured, Western Title Insurance and Guaranty Company, for a loss sustained on certain instruments forged by one Ila Irvine, the manager of an apartment house in San Francisco, owned by the respondents. The trial court sustained the respondents' demurrer to the amended complaint, and this appeal is taken from the judgment on the demurrer. The only question presented is whethr the trial court properly concluded that the loss caused by forgery should be borne by the appellant surety rather than the respondents.
The facts are not in dispute. The San Francisco property was acquired by the respondents in 1950 and managed for them by Ila Irvine, as the respondents, Berta G. De Strajman and Elisa S. De Hoffmann, were residents of Buenos Aires, Argentina, at the time of the forgery here involved and at all other times relevant to this action. Mrs. Irvine collected the rents on the San Francisco property but neglected her duties of paying the monthly mortgage installments and United States income taxes. As a result, the holder of the first deed of trust, Bayview Federal Savings and Loan Association (hereafter referred to as Bayview) recorded a notice of default, and the United States filed lines against the property.
In May 1956, the respondents, who were not aware of Mrs. Irvine's activities, borrowed $27,000 from Home Federal Savings and Loan Association to pay off what they assumed was the balance then owing to Bayview. The proceeds of this loan were delivered to Western Title to pay Bayview. At the same time, in order to obtain the additional funds necessary to pay off the liens, Mrs. Irvine borrowed $4,500 from Irving and Florence Holcenberg who took a note and second deed of trust as security. The names of both respondents were forged by Mrs. Irvine on these instruments. The Holcenbergs relied on the forged documents and delivered the proceeds of the loan to the trustee, Western Title, and obtained a title insurance policy.
Subsequently, the Bayview and United States liens were satisfied and the respondents discovered the forgeries. For more than a year prior to the date on the deed of trust and note, the respondents had been living in South America. Mrs. Irvine admitted the forgeries in a written confession. The Holcenbergs filed a claim against Western Title. Western Title, pursuant to its policy, paid them the $4,500. Appellant, Fedelity and Deposit Company of Maryland, in turn, indemnified Western Title under its agreement to hold its insured harmless for any losses sustained by forgeries. Appellant, as the assignee of the Holcenbergs and Western Title, brought this action to reinstate the Bayview and United States liens and asked to have these liens foreclosed for its benefit as respondents were unjustly enriched at its expense. Even though respondents had their liens paid off by the Holcenberg loan, this was not an unjust enrichment as far as appellant surety is...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Federal Ins. Co. v. Arthur Andersen & Co.
...see, e.g., Meyers v. Bank of Am. Natl. Trust & Sav. Assn., 11 Cal.2d 92, 77 P.2d 1084, 1093 [1938]; Fidelity & Deposit Co. v. De Strajman, 29 Cal.Rptr. 855, 215 Cal.App.2d 10 [1st Dist.1963]; 11A Appleman, Insurance Law & Practice § 6551, at 4), that fact has not precluded subrogation where......
-
Hartford Acc. & Indem. Co. v. All Am. Nut Co.
...an innocent third party and hence no subrogation would lie in favor of plaintiff's fidelity insurer. Fidelity & Deposit Co. of Maryland v. De Strajman, 215 A.C.A. 10, 29 Cal.Rptr. 855 (no petition for hearing in Supreme Court filed). The Fidelity and Deposit Company sued to recover moneys p......
-
Golden Eagle Ins. Co. v. First Nationwide Financial Corp.
...an asserted legal right under an assignment." (Id., at pp. 96-97, 77 P.2d 1084) see also, e.g., Fidelity and Deposit Co. of Maryland v. De Strajman (1963) 215 Cal.App.2d 10, 12, 29 Cal.Rptr. 855.) Thus, whether or not there is a formal assignment, the nature and extent of the rights against......
-
Pacific Indem. Co. v. Security First Nat. Bank
...(Traner v. Crocker Anglo National Bank, 173 Cal.App.2d 779 at 781--782, 343 P.2d 974.) See also, Fidelity and Deposit Co. of Maryland v. De Strajman, 215 Cal.App.2d 10, 12, 29 Cal.Rptr. 855. I would 1 On this subject the following questions and answers were given by Brown: 'Q. Would you loo......