Jennings v. Jennings

• Docket Number: B327268,B328977
• Decision Date: 28 December 2023
• Parties: MARGARET L. JENNINGS, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. TERESA D. JENNINGS, Defendant and Appellant.
• Court: California Court of Appeals Court of Appeals

1

MARGARET L. JENNINGS, Plaintiff and Respondent,
v.
TERESA D. JENNINGS, Defendant and Appellant.

B327268, B328977

California Court of Appeals, Second District, First Division

December 28, 2023

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, No. 21CMCV00006 Michael Shultz, Judge. Affirmed in part, reversed in part.

The Green Firm and Noah Green for Defendant and Appellant.

Stone & Sallus, Daniel R. Sallus, and Shenne J. Hahn for Plaintiff and Respondent.

CHANEY, J.

2

In the proceedings below, respondent Margaret L. Jennings accused her daughter, appellant Teresa D. Jennings, her son, Montoya Jennings, and an attorney, Lisa Collins-Williams, of stealing her house by way of a quitclaim deed transferring title from Margaret to Teresa and Montoya, a deed that Margaret insisted she did not sign and of which she had been unaware.^[1]She also claimed that after the house was transferred into Teresa and Montoya's name, they began depriving her of access to the house, to her car, and to her bank accounts.

After a six-day jury trial, the jury found both Teresa and Collins-Williams liable to Margaret for financial elder abuse and fraudulent concealment, and found Teresa liable to Margaret for conversion / trespass to chattels.^[2] The jury also awarded punitive damages against Collins-Williams. Teresa filed a motion for a new trial and the court informed Margaret that because it believed that a portion of the damages awarded by the jury represented the value of the house, and the court intended to cancel the quitclaim deed, essentially returning the house to Margaret, the court intended to grant the new trial motion unless Margaret accepted a reduction in the damages awarded. Margaret agreed, and a judgment was ultimately entered: (1) awarding Margaret $6,500 in economic damages and $15,000 in non-economic damages against both Teresa and Collins-Williams for financial elder abuse; (2) awarding Margaret $4,000 in damages against Teresa for conversion and trespass to chattels; (3) awarding Margaret $10,000 in punitive damages against

3

Collins-Williams; and (4) cancelling the quitclaim deed. Thereafter, the court granted Margaret's motion for attorneys' fees, awarding $123,206.50 in fees.

On appeal, Teresa contends that substantial evidence does not support the jury's verdict and that to the extent attorneys' fees should have been awarded at all, the amount awarded was excessive.^[3] We conclude that, with one exception-the $6,500 in economic damages awarded for financial elder abuse- substantial evidence supports the jury's verdict. We additionally conclude the court did not abuse its discretion in the amount of attorneys' fees awarded. We therefore reverse only the portion of the judgment awarding $6,500 in economic damages and affirm the remainder.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND^[4]

A. Complaints

1. Margaret's Complaint

In January 2021, Margaret filed a complaint. In August 2021, Margaret filed a verified first amended complaint (FAC, the operative complaint) against Teresa, Montoya, and Collins-Williams.

The FAC alleged that in October 2019, Teresa brought Margaret to her longtime friend Collins-Williams, an attorney whom she claimed would help Margaret with her estate planning. With Teresa present, Margaret expressed to Collins-Williams

4

"her intent to stay in her home and her intent to distribute her assets after her death." However, Collins-Williams drafted a quitclaim deed transferring the house from Margaret to Teresa and Montoya, "which was never Plaintiff's intent." Collins-Williams did not explain that signing a quitclaim deed would result in an immediate transfer of ownership; instead, Collins-Williams simply asked Margaret to sign some documents, which she later gave to Teresa.^[5]

In May 2020, Margaret spoke with another attorney, Evelyn Gillespie. In July 2020, Gillespie prepared a living trust for Margaret, along with a grant deed transferring title of the house from Margaret to the living trust. Teresa did not record the quitclaim deed until September 2020.

The FAC also alleged that, in 2020, Teresa took "complete control" of her mother's personal property such as her car and her bank accounts. Margaret alleged that Teresa took the keys to her car and refused to return them. After Margaret demanded the return of the car in writing, Teresa returned it to her house, but kept the keys.

Margaret additionally alleged that Teresa had been added to her bank accounts without Margaret's knowledge or consent, and "transferred $42,647.02 to Teresa's own personal account, leaving $0.12 in" Margaret's account. Margaret filed a fraud claim with the bank and, despite Collins-Williams's representation to the bank that Teresa had "a legal right over [Margaret]'s affairs," the bank reversed the transfer. Despite this, in July 2020, Teresa took another $499 of Margaret's money.

5

Based on these allegations, Margaret brought causes of action for financial elder abuse, fraud, negligent misrepresentation, professional negligence, cancellation of instrument, conversion, and trespass to chattels. Teresa, Montoya, and Collins-Williams answered the FAC in September 2021.

2. Teresa's and Montoya's Cross-Complaint

In March 2021, Teresa and Montoya filed a crosscomplaint. In April 2021, they filed a verified first amended cross-complaint (FACC) against Margaret, alleging causes of action for partition and quiet title. The FACC alleged that, pursuant to their mother's wishes for the house to be sold after her death, with the proceeds split among the surviving siblings, Teresa took their mother to an attorney's office in October 2019, where a quitclaim deed was signed transferring the house to Teresa and Montoya in fee simple. However, approximately six months later, Margaret's daughter Margaret M. Jennings moved Margaret into her home, and subsequently brought Margaret to another attorney. This attorney prepared a trust and a grant deed transferring the house to the trust. This deed was recorded in August 2020. Teresa subsequently recorded the earlier quitclaim deed. Based on these allegations, Teresa and Montoya sought to quiet title to the house, and for the house to be sold and the proceeds divided among Teresa, Montoya, and their remaining siblings. Margaret answered the FACC in June 2021.

B. Trial

A six-day jury trial commenced in August 2022. Several witnesses testified. We summarize only the testimony pertinent to this appeal.

6

1. Margaret L. Jennings

Margaret testified that she had purchased the house with her husband in 1962. In October 2019, approximately six months after her husband's death, Margaret and Teresa went to Collins-Williams's office to create a living trust-it was Teresa's idea to use Collins-Williams. Margaret told Collins-Williams that she wanted to remain in her home and in "full control." Margaret was never told she would be transferring title of the house out of her name, which was something she would never want to do.

Teresa was present the entire time Margaret was with Collins-Williams. Collins-Williams gave Margaret two pieces of paper to sign; Margaret did not know what was contained within the papers. However, she was adamant that she had never signed a quitclaim deed, and that no one ever explained the different types of deeds to her.^[6] After signing the two pieces of paper, Margaret asked Collins-Williams whether there was anything else to sign and Collins-Williams responded that she and Teresa could "finish the papers up." Margaret testified no notary was present when she signed the papers.

Sometime later, Margaret learned from another attorney that she no longer owned the house. When she asked Collins-Williams about this, Collins-Williams told her she needed to speak with her family and then stopped answering Margaret's calls.

Teresa and Montoya told Margaret that she could not return to the house unless she agreed to pay for a caregiver. When speaking about the situation with Montoya, he claimed

7

they had done Margaret a favor by taking the house out of her name, because she could now receive money from the County, something Margaret did not want to do. Margaret requested that title to the house be restored to her, but Teresa refused, claiming Margaret would "give it to the grandkids." Additionally, after Margaret made this request, Teresa threatened to force Margaret to "spend every penny [she] had."

Margaret also testified that Teresa took the keys to her car as well as all of Margaret's "important papers." Margaret was forced to pay $1,400 to have new keys made for her car.

Teresa also managed to be added to Margaret's bank accounts without Margaret's knowledge or permission. In or around May 2020, Margaret discovered that an account that had previously contained $42,647.02 now contained only $0.12; Teresa had transferred the remainder out of the account. When Margaret discovered this, she asked her granddaughter to take her to the bank. When she arrived at the bank, Montoya was present.^[7] Montoya pointed his finger in her face and ordered her to get back into her car. After the incident at the bank, Margaret went to live with another daughter (Margaret M.). The bank eventually restored the transferred funds back to her account.

2. Margaret M. Jennings

Margaret's daughter, Margaret M., testified about the incident in which her brother Montoya confronted her mother at

8

the bank around the end of April 2020. Margaret M. stated that her daughter called her to inform her that Montoya was yelling at Margaret. As Margaret M. drove toward the bank, she could hear Montoya yelling at Margaret to go home, and that he would not return her walker if she did not go home. Margaret M. called the sheriff's department, and deputies met her at the bank. Teresa was also present. After the deputies spoke with everyone, one retrieved and returned...