CONNIE WONG ET AL VS. LINDA YEE ET AL

SF Superior Court - Real Property / Housing Dept 501 - CGC24623115 - September 29, 2025 Hearing date: September 29, 2025 Case number: CGC24623115 Case title: CONNIE WONG ET AL VS. LINDA YEE ET AL Case Number: | | CGC24623115 | Case Title: | | CONNIE WONG ET AL VS. LINDA YEE ET AL | Court Date: | | 2025-09-29 09:30 AM | Calendar Matter: | | MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS | Rulings: | | Real Property/Housing Court motion calendar for September 29, 2025, line 3.

Defendants' Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.

According to the Notice of Motion the grounds for the motion are that all causes of action "flow from an alleged oral agreement between plaintiff's now-deceased parents and defendant Linda Yee to co-own, as tenants-in-common, real property located in this judicial district." In the points and authorities moving party does not identify any causes of action that stem solely from an agreement between "plaintiff's now-deceased parents and defendants." Any such "agreement" appears to be a foundational fact stated in the complaint describing title as it existed between 1987 (Complaint paragraph 10) and 2003 (Complaint, paragraph 13).

Complaint alleges changes to the title from "tenants-in-common" to "joint tenants" memorialized in writing and an oral agreement with Plaintiff, individually, as described in paragraph 23 of the complaint (not "an alleged oral agreement between plaintiff's now-deceased parents and defendant Linda Yee to co-own, as tenants-in-common.")

Motion is DENIED as to the cause of action for elder abuse, which expressly is not based on any oral agreement. (Complaint, paragraphs 29 and 30).

Motion is DENIED as to the cause of action for cancellation of instruments. The argument supporting the motion does not match the sole ground for the motion as listed in the Notice (i.e. the purported lack of factual support to the mutual mistake claim).

Motion is GRANTED as to the cause of action for fraud with leave to amend for Plaintiff to assert facts in support of each element of fraud including lack of intent to perform at the time the promise was made as outlined in the case cited by Plaintiff, Tenzer v. Superscope Inc. (1985) 39 Cal.3d 18.

Motion is GRANTED with leave to amend as to all other causes of action which are all rooted in the oral agreement as described in paragraph 23 of the complaint. Plaintiff shall allege facts (not conclusions) in support of exemption from the Statute of Frauds, e.g. estoppel, partial performance, etc. =(501/CFH)

Parties may appear in-person, telephonically or via Zoom [Webinar ID: 160 560 5023; Password: 172849; Phone Dial in: (669) 254-5252]. Parties who intend to appear at the hearing must give notice to opposing parties and the court promptly, but no later than 4:00 p.m. the court day before the hearing unless the tentative ruling has specified that a hearing is required. Notice of contesting a tentative ruling shall be provided by sending an email to the court to Department501ContestTR@sftc.org with a copy to all other parties stating, without argument, the portion(s) of the tentative ruling that the party contests. A party may not argue at the hearing if the opposing party is not so notified and the opposing party does not appear. | |