Opinion ID: 2594455
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: facts

Text: [¶3] The facts of this case are simple and are largely not in dispute. On May 8, 1998, Hazel G. Sherard and her son, George E. Sherard (George), executed a document entitled, Contract And Declaration Of A Business Organization  A Common Law Business Trust Organization Also Known As An Unincorporated Business Organization, which authorized its trustees to operate under the name of GUNTO IO REO (hereinafter Trust). [1] Additional documents were executed in connection with the Trust including conveyances of real property to the Trust. [2] Ms. Sherard and George became the sole trustees of the Trust. The ownership of the Trust was comprised of 100 units  the total number of units that the Trust Agreement authorized. Trust Certificate No. 1 was issued to Ms. Sherard representing her fifty units and George was issued Trust Certificate No. 2 representing his fifty units. Both certificates were retained in the records of the Trust. [¶4] Ms. Sherard died on May 2, 2001, leaving five surviving children: George, Jake H. Sherard (Jake), Harold C. Sherard (Harold), John W. Sherard (John) and Nila K. Hickman Yoctorowic (Nila). Shortly before her death, Ms. Sherard executed two documents that create the basis for the current dispute. The first document, referred to by the parties as the Transfer Document, was executed on April 24, 2001, and purported to make John a certificate holder of the Trust. The document stated in pertinent part: I, Hazel Sherard, do hereby give, endow, assign, or transfer unto John William Sherard, the Trust Certificate Units represented by Trust Certificate Number 50 [a]s recorded by the Secretary of . . . GUNTO IO REO. The second document was a Quitclaim Deed signed on May 1, 2001, by Ms. Sherard and George in their capacity as trustees. This deed transferred the real property from the Trust to four of Ms. Sherard's children: George, Harold, Nila and Jake. John was not identified as a grantee on the deed. [¶5] After Ms. Sherard's death, the children held a family meeting to discuss the disposition of her possessions. At the meeting, John presented the Transfer Document to his siblings for the first time. John also discovered that he was not a grantee on the Quitclaim Deed. [¶6] John filed a declaratory judgment action seeking a determination that the deed was null and void. [3] He also alleged that he was fraudulently deprived of his ownership of fifty units of the Trust. Subsequently, an amended complaint was filed in which John's sister, Nila, joined the suit as co-plaintiff. The Appellees filed a counterclaim asking the court, inter alia, to find the Transfer Document of no force or effect and to quiet title to the real property and confirm their ownership interests. [¶7] A bench trial was held on July 22, 2005. At the close of Appellants' evidence, Appellees moved for judgment as a matter of law on the claim of fraud. The district court granted the motion. At the conclusion of the trial, the district court ruled that the Transfer Document was unenforceable and declared the Quitclaim Deed valid. This appeal followed.