Riley v. Riley
Decision Date | 20 May 1953 |
Citation | 118 Cal.App.2d 11,256 P.2d 1056 |
Parties | RILEY et al. v. RILEY. Civ. 4720. |
Court | California Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
Alford P. Olmstead and John N. Hurtt, Los Angeles, for appellants.
Bertram H. Ross, Los Angeles, and Forgy, Reinhaus & Forgy, Santa Ana, for respondent.
Plaintiffs appeal from a judgment in favor of defendant in an action to impress a trust on a fractional interest in and to certain real and personal property, for the purpose of enforcing the provisions of an agreement to execute a will. The record contains an agreed statement on appeal from which it appears that 'the principal question on this appeal relates to the construction given by the lower court to the terms and provisions of a Property Settlement Agreement dated December 6, 1941, of a Declaration of Trust executed the same date in connection therewith, and of a subsequent agreement dated May 26, 1947; specifically the question is whether plaintiffs lost their rights created under said Property Settlement Agreement and said Declaration of Trust by their parents having executed said Agreement dated May 26, 1947.'
The material facts stated are these: Plaintiffs are the minor children of Chester J. Riley and Aileen S. Riley, who, on December 6, 1941, entered into a property settlement agreement providing in part as follows:
'1. The parties hereto agree to transfer, assign, convey and set over unto Charles P. Young all of the property, real, personal or mixed, as set forth and described in 'Exhibit A' hereto attached, the same to be held in trust, however, by said Charles P. Young in accordance with the terms and provisions of a certain Agreement and Declaration of Trust dated the 6 day of December, 1941, and executed concurrently with this agreement, a copy of which Agreement and Declaration of Trust is attached hereto marked 'Exhibit B' and by such reference thereto made a part hereof.
In connection therewith and as part of the same transaction as the execution of said property settlement agreement, Charles P. Young, as trustee, executed a 'Declaration of Trust' which contained the following provisions:
'One-half (1/2) thereof to the Trustor Aileen S. Riley, or her heirs, successors or assigns, or any legatees or devisees that she may name in her last will and testament;
'The remaining one-half (1/2) to the trustor Chester J. Riley, or his heirs, successors or assigns, or any legatees or devisees that he may name in his last will and testament;
'It being understood that each of the Trustors hereby agree that upon the death of either of said trustors the children of the parties hereto shall succeed to an undivided one-third of the undivided one-half of each of the trustors.
'It is further understood irrespective of any of the other provisions of this trust, that the same may at any time be terminated upon the mutual consent and approval and agreement of each of the trustors herein.'
Pursuant to said property settlement agreement and declaration of trust, the real and personal property described in said declaration of trust was, on December 6, 1941, deeded and conveyed by Chester J. Riley and Aileen S. Riley to Charles P. Young, the trustee mentioned in said declaration of trust. Thereafter, on May 26, 1947, Chester J. Riley, Aileen S. Riley and Charles P. Young, as said trustee, executed an agreement relating to said trust. This agreement recited that the parties had composed their differences and desired to effect a final accounting concerning said trust, the termination and closing thereof and...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
R. J. Cardinal Co. v. Ritchie
...187 P.2d 83.) Rescission of such contract thereupon deprives the beneficiary of all rights under the contract. (Riley v. Riley (1953) 118 Cal.App.2d 11, 15, 256 P.2d 1056.) However, the third-party beneficiary contract cannot be rescinded or revoked, as long as the promisor retains or conti......
-
Mitchell v. Marklund
...the will and she proceeded to make a new and different will and put certain property in joint tenancy. In Riley v. Riley, 118 Cal.App.2d 11, at page 15, 256 P.2d 1056, at page 1058, the court 'The parties to a contract entered into for the benefit of third persons may rescind or abrogate it......
-
Riley v. Riley
...court. Riley v. Superior Court, 111 Cal.App.2d 365, 244 P.2d 474; Estate of Riley, 115 Cal.App.2d 495, 252 P.2d 395; Riley v. Riley, 118 Cal.App.2d 11, 256 P.2d 1056. The plaintiff is the former wife of Chester J. Riley. The couple had three sons. In 1941, they executed a property settlemen......
-
James v. Pawsey
...assent of such third persons at any time before the contract is accepted, adopted, or acted upon by such third persons. Riley v. Riley, 118 Cal.App.2d 11, 256 P.2d 1056; 17 C.J.S. Contracts § 50, p. 398; Restatement of Contracts, § 142, p. 168. Acceptance by a third party donee beneficiary ......