Opinion
No. FST CV 02 0189366
December 27, 2005
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION
This action, which was tried to the court, seeks to quiet title to real property located at 120 Water Street in Norwalk, as authorized by General Statutes § 47-31. The plaintiff, Willis Cavanaugh, claims to own a one-third interest in said premises because of either or both of two theories. The first is that a resulting trust in his favor was created when he contributed one-half of the down payment when the subject premises were purchased in 1962, and thereafter a partnership in which he had a one-third interest paid the mortgage on said property. His second theory is that he is the grantee of a deed dated September 30, 1993, from the record owners of the premises, which deed was delivered to him in 2003 and recorded in the Norwalk land records during that year.
General Statutes § 47-31 provides in pertinent part that a person claiming title to or interest in real property may bring an action "against any person who may claim to own the property . . . or to have any interest in the property . . . adverse to that of the plaintiff . . ." Section (f) of this statute provides that: "[T]he court shall hear the several claims and determine the rights of the parties, whether derived from deeds, wills or other instruments or sources of title, and may determine the construction of the same, and render judgment determining the questions and disputes and quieting and settling the title to the property."
The defendants are Joseph Richichi and Leslie Miklovich, as co-executors of the estate of Hillard E. Bloom, Tallmadge Brothers, Inc. and Robert W. Bloom and John Gardella, trustees for Norman R. Bloom, deceased. The co-executors of the estate of Hillard E. Bloom agree that the plaintiff is entitled to a one-third interest in the premises. Tallmadge Brothers, Inc. takes no position on the plaintiff's claim and the plaintiff on his part agrees that Tallmadge Brothers, Inc. owns a one-third interest by virtue of a deed from Wallace H. Bell, Jr.
John Gardella, trustee, was defaulted for failure to appear and did not play any role in these proceedings.
Robert Bloom, trustee for his deceased father, Norman, disputes the validity of the plaintiff's claims, arguing that a resulting trust was not imposed on the subject premises and that there had not been a proper delivery of a deed to the plaintiff conveying to him any interest in the premises.
The starting point for the analysis of the plaintiff's claims is December 24, 1962, when Helen Soderstrom, Beatrice Berg and Grace Wolfe executed a warranty deed to 120 Water Street, Norwalk, to Hillard E. Bloom, his brother Norman R. Bloom and Wallace H. Bell, Jr. This deed was recorded in the Norwalk land records in volume 591, page 536. The plaintiff's name did not appear as a grantee because the grantors did not know the plaintiff and were apparently reluctant to include him in the deed of conveyance. The plaintiff did, however, pay the grantors $5,000, which was one-half of the $10,000 deposit or down payment. The grantees took out a mortgage for approximately $45,000, which was paid by a partnership called Bell's Boatyard, which ran an oyster business from 120 Water Street, and of which the plaintiff was a one-third partner.
In addition, there was credible testimony that Hillard Bloom always recognized that the plaintiff had ownership rights in the subject premises and so advised both his daughter, Leslie Miklovich, who is also the niece of the plaintiff, and Joseph Richichi, his lawyer and close friend.
Mr. Richichi was asked: Question: "Did Hillard Bloom ever discuss with you, Wallace — Willis Cavanaugh's interest in 20 Water Street, Norwalk?" Answer: "Yes." Question: "Do you recall what Hillard Bloom told you about Willis Cavanaugh's interest?" Answer: "Yes." Question: "What did he tell you?" Answer: "Basically, that in effect Willis Cavanaugh was a one-third owner of the property; despite the fact that his name was not on the deed." On cross examination, Mr. Richichi repeated that Hillard Boom had "always specified" that: "Don't forget Willis Cavanaugh owns a third of the premises."
Mrs. Miklovich was asked: Question: "Did your father tell you what percentage or fraction interest Willis Cavanaugh owned in the 120 Water Street property?" Answer: "He was a third partner." Question: "And you testified that your father indicated during the period he was dying that he had already taken care of the title problem or the title issue, concerning Willis Cavanaugh's one-third interest; is that correct?" Answer: "That's what he told me." Question: "Did he tell you that he had signed a deed to that effect?" Answer: "He just told me he took care of it." Question: "Did he tell you that he believed that when you and he were discussing this matter that Willis Cavanaugh had in fact received his one-third interest?" Answer: "He said he was a one-third owner of the property." Question: "Did you ever discuss these issues with your Uncle Norman?" Answer: "In earlier years before he died." Question: "And did you discuss particularly with Uncle Norm, with your Uncle Norman, whether Willis Cavanaugh owned a one-third interest in 120 Water Street?" Answer: "Yes." Question: "And can you tell the Court what Norman Bloom told you?" Answer: "That he had owned one-third, Willis did, and Wally Bell owned a third, and my father and Uncle Norm owned a third together."
Under these circumstances, a resulting trust was created to insure the plaintiff's interest in 120 Water Street, Norwalk. Resulting trusts arise by operation of law in Connecticut when at the time of a conveyance the purchase money for property is paid by one party and the legal title is taken in the name of another. Cohen v. Cohen, 182 Conn. 193, 201, 438 A.2d 58 (1980). The party seeking to impose the resulting trust need only show that the purchase money was paid by him and legal title was taken in another to gain the benefit of a resulting trust. Farrah v. Farrah, 187 Conn. 495, 501, 446 A.2d 1075 (1982). The plaintiff has sustained his burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that he paid a half of the down payment and a third of the subsequent mortgage payments, and that a resulting trust in his favor was created.
The plaintiff also alleges that he is the grantee of a quitclaim deed dated October 1, 1993, from the then owners of the subject premise, Hillard E. Bloom, Wallace H. Bell, Jr. and Robert W. Bloom, as executor of the estate of his late father, Norman R. Bloom. This deed was not delivered to the plaintiff and recorded until 2003. The "[d]elivery of a deed coupled with intent by the grantor to pass title is necessary for a valid conveyance . . . The delivery of a deed includes not only an act by which the grantor parts with the possession of it, but also a concurring intent on the part of the grantor that it shall vest the title in the grantee . . ." (Citations omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) McCook v. Coutu, 31 Conn.App. 696, CT Page 16852 701, 626 A.2d 1321, cert. denied, 227 Conn. 911, 632 A.2d 692 (1993). "The delivery of a deed with intent by the grantor to pass title is essential to a valid conveyance." Bell v. Bloom, 146 Conn. 307, 308, 150 A.2d 300 (1959). "The delivery of a deed includes not only an act by which the grantor parts with possession of it, but also a concurring intent on the part of the grantor that it shall vest the title in the grantee." Costello v. Costello, 136 Conn. 611, 615-16, 73 A.2d 333 (1950). There was credible testimony that the 1993 deed from the three grantors was first delivered to an Attorney R. Desarbo in New Haven with instructions not to deliver the deed until the estate of Norman Bloom was settled. The settlement of the estate has been completed and Leslie Miklovich, Hillard Bloom's daughter and Norman Bloom's niece, found this 1993 deed in the papers returned to her by the New Haven attorney. She delivered the deed to the plaintiff who then recorded it in the Norwalk land records on May 29, 2003 in volume 4920, page 334. The deed contained "executor's covenants" from Robert Bloom, who agreed that he did in fact sign the deed. Among other things, the deed to the plaintiff stated that its purpose was to "correct any deficiencies of a deed recorded in the Norwalk Land Records in Volume 591, Page 536" and that the result is that one-third of the subject premises would be owned by Wallace H. Bell, Jr., "One-third (1/3rd) interest to Willis Cavanaugh," one-sixth for Hillard E. Bloom and one-sixth for Robert W. Bloom, as executor of the estate of Norman R. Bloom, deceased.
Robert W. Bloom readily agreed that he executed the 1993 deed in favor of the plaintiff. He also agreed that he never told anyone not to deliver the deed to the plaintiff.
Question: "And you never gave Desarbo instructions not to deliver to anybody, did you?" Answer: "No, it was my understanding when I closed the estate all these deeds were going to be delivered." Question: "All right. Well, the estate has been closed, right?" Answer: "Not by me." Question: "Well, the estate has been closed?" Answer: "Yes." Question: "Right. And you never instructed Hillard not to deliver that deed, did you?" Answer "No? Question: "And you never instructed anybody from Tallmadge Brothers not to deliver the deed either, did you?" Answer: "No." Question: Nor did you instruct Mr. Bell not to deliver that deed? Answer: "No."
In conclusion, a resulting trust was created in 1963, when the plaintiff paid half of the down payment and a third of the mortgage, and the deed from the three record owners of the subject premises is valid and binding even though not delivered and recorded for ten years after its execution. In accordance with General Statutes § 47-31, the plaintiff, Willis Cavanaugh, is deemed to own one-third of the subject premises.
So Ordered.