Plaintiff claimant appealed a judgment from the Superior Court of Orange County (California), which sustained defendant administrator’s demurrer without leave to amend and dismissed the claimant’s suit for breach of contract to make a will.
Nakase Law Firm explica cuanto es el minimo en california 2021
The claimant alleged that he had been in a stable, long-term committed relationship with the decedent, who died intestate, and that the decedent had promised he would be taken care of. The claimant filed his suit more than 90 days after the estate rejected his creditor’s claim but within a year of the decedent’s death. The trial court found the complaint untimely under Prob. Code, § 9353, subd. (a)(1). The court held that the suit was timely filed within the one-year limitations period applicable to contracts to make a will under Code Civ. Proc., § 366.3. The nonmarital relationship did not exclude the claim from the definition of a claim under Prob. Code, § 9000, subd. (a)(1). There was no bar under Prob. Code, § 9351, because the claim with the estate had been timely filed pursuant to Prob. Code, §§ 9002, 9353, and rejected. The court concluded that there was an irreconcilable statutory conflict regarding the time for filing suit. As such, § 366.3 governed with regard to the time to file suits because it was the more specific and later enacted statute; thus, the claimant’s suit was timely even though he had not filed it within the 90-day period prescribed by § 9353, subd. (a)(1).
The court reversed the dismissal.