Muktarian v. Barmby

Muktarian v. Barmby (1965) 63 Cal.2d 558, started as a quiet title suit by a father, who was in possession of certain real property, against his son to whom he had, 14 years earlier, deeded the property although reserving a life estate. The deed was given, allegedly because of pressure by the son, to preclude the property from going to the father's second wife. The trial court "concluded that the action was barred by the three-year statute of limitations applicable to actions for relief on the ground of fraud or mistake" ( Id. at p. 559), but the Supreme Court reversed. It first reiterated the point, noted above, that "since there is no statute of limitations governing quiet title actions as such, it is ordinarily necessary to refer to the underlying theory of relief to determine which statute applies." ( Id. at p. 560.) But the Court held that that principle was inapplicable in the case before it. "In the present case, however, it is unnecessary to determine which statute would otherwise apply, for no statute of limitations runs against a plaintiff seeking to quiet title while he is in possession of the property." (Ibid.) It then explained why this is so: "In many instances one in possession would not know of dormant adverse claims of persons not in possession." (Ibid.)