Sipe v. McKenna

• Court: California Court of Appeals
• Writing for the Court: WILSON; MOORE, P. J., and McCOMB
• Citation: Sipe v. McKenna, 233 P.2d 615, 105 Cal.App.2d 373 (Cal. App. 1951)
• Decision Date: 12 July 1951
• Parties: SIPE v. McKENNA et al. Civ. 18336.

Page 615

233 P.2d 615

105 Cal.App.2d 373

SIPE v. McKENNA et al.

Civ. 18336.

District Court of Appeal, Second District, Division 2, California.

July 12, 1951.

Hearing Denied Sept. 7, 1951.

Cal.App.therine A. McKenna, of Los Angeles, in pro. per.

J. Irving McKenna, of Los Angeles, for appellants Herman A. Paulk and Mary Agnes Paulk.

Robt. E. Rosskopf, of Beverly Hills, for respondent.

WILSON, Justice.

Defendants have appealed from a judgment cancelling, vacating and holding null and void a decree quieting title to real property in Los Angeles County rendered in an action entitled Catherine A. McKenna, plaintiff, versus The Escrow Corporation, Herman A. Paulk, Mary Agnes Paulk and others, defendants.

The court found that on or about June 21, 1930, for a valuable consideration, defendants Herman A. Paulk and Mary Agnes Paulk made, executed and delivered to Alma Stiebitz their promissory note secured by a deed of trust executed by them, and recorded in the office of the county recorder, upon the property described in the aforesaid action and in the complaint in the case at bar to The Escrow Corporation for the benefit of Alma Stiebitz; that thereafter the promissory note and deed of trust were transferred to Olga Schrago, who thereafter transferred them to plaintiff in the instant action; that the promissory note has not been paid except a small sum on account of interest; that the decree in the aforesaid action purporting to quiet title in the plaintiff therein, Catherine A. McKenna, was rendered pursuant to a fraudulent scheme and conspiracy on the part of Catherine A. McKenna, Herman A. Paulk and Mary Agnes Paulk and by the practice of fraud upon the court; that at the time of the filing of the aforesaid action Catherine A. McKenna was not the true owner of the real property described in the complaint but that defendants Herman A. Paulk and Mary Agnes Paulk were, and had been since June 21, 1930, the true owners thereof that for the purpose of making it appear that Catherine A. McKenna was the owner of the property defendants caused to be recorded a deed from the Paulks to Sarah O'Neill, a relative of Mary Agnes Paulk, and thereafter a deed from Sarah O'Neill to Catherine A. McKenna, both of which purported transfers were without consideration and were made for the sole benefit of defendants and in furtherance of the aforesaid fraudulent scheme and conspiracy; that affidavits of service were filed in the aforesaid action executed by J. M. McKenna, the son of Catherine A. McKenna, and sworn to before J. Irving McKenna, a notary public, the husband of Catherine A. McKenna, alleging the service of complaint and summons in the aforesaid action; that said affidavits of service were false and fraudulent in that summons and complaint in said action were not served upon any of the defendants therein except defendants Paulk; that after the entry of the decree in said action defendants Catherine A. McKenna, Herman A. Paulk and Mary Agnes Paulk...