Opinion
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
Super. Ct. No. A247421
ORDER MODIFYING OPINION; DENIAL OF REQUEST FOR PUBLICATION; DENIAL OF PETITION FOR REHEARING.
BEDSWORTH, J.
It is ordered that the opinion filed herein on March 27, 2009, be modified in the following particular:
1. On page 6, bottom of the page, at the end of the last full paragraph, which ends with “subdivision (b)” add the following footnote:
“fnOn a petition for rehearing, Seay argues the complaint should be liberally construed to include a request to sell Ferrante’s interest as beneficiary of the trust. He points out it alleged Ferrante was a beneficiary and Ferrante retained a ‘full interest in the [residence] during the trust’s term.’ Seay also contends his failure to specifically request sale of this interest in the prayer for relief is not necessarily fatal, since he also requested such additional relief as the court deemed proper. All of this is true.
“The problem remains the complaint simply did not request sale of Ferrante’s interest as beneficiary of the trust. It alleged he was a beneficiary and a beneficiary’s interest may be sold to satisfy a creditor’s judgment. But that was not the theory of the complaint. Rather, it was Ferrante was effectively the owner of the residence, since the trust was revocable and used to defraud creditors, so the residence should be sold to satisfy Seay’s judgment. In other words, Seay went after the fee interest in the residence, not the leasehold and reversion Ferrante held as a beneficiary of the trust.”
This modification does not effect a change in judgment.
The accounting firm of Letwak and Bennett has requested that our opinion, filed on March 27, 2009, be certified for publication. Our opinion does not meet the standards set forth in California Rules of Court, rule 8.1105(c), and the author is concerned that the burgeoning number of reported decisions has already become a near-unmanageable burden for attorneys. The request is DENIED.
Pursuant to California Rules of Court, rule 8.1120(b), the clerk of this court is directed to forward a copy of our opinion, this order and the request for publication to the Supreme Court.
Appellant’s petition for rehearing is DENIED.
WE CONCUR: RYLAARSDAM, ACTING P. J., ARONSON, J.