In re- JAMES E. DETIEGE and AMY A. DETIEGE
- Summarized by Hilda Montes de Oca , U.S. Bankruptcy Court, Central District of California
- 3 years 11 months ago
- Case Type:
- Consumer
- Case Status:
- Affirmed
- Citation:
- ID-21-1177-GBS; 2022 WL 843374 (B.A.P. 9th Cir. March 22, 2022) (9th Circuit, Mar 22,2022) Not Published
- Tag(s):
-
- Ruling:
- Affirming the bankruptcy court, the Ninth Circuit Bankruptcy Appellate Panel (the “BAP”) held that the bankruptcy court did not abuse its discretion when it found that Appellee’s contributions totaling $92,000 towards the purchase of a home (the “Property”) were not gifts under Idaho law, and imposed a constructive trust and lien on the Property in favor of Appellee.
- Procedural context:
- Appeal from an order of the bankruptcy court for the District of Idaho after trial, imposing a constructive trust against real property under Idaho state law, reviewed for abuse of discretion.
- Facts:
- In 2016, Appellants James and Amy Detiege (“Debtors”) and Appellee Maria Rosauer, Debtor James’ mother, discussed buying a home together and shared their plan with multiple family members. Appellee contributed a total of $92,000 so Debtors could purchase the Property and signed a letter stating that no repayment was expected or implied (the “Gift Letter”), which was required by the mortgage lender. Debtor James told Appellee that, although title to the Property was placed only in Debtors’ names, she would be added to the title after two years. After purchasing the Property, the relationship between the parties deteriorated and Debtors prevented Appellee from entering the Property or accessing her personal belongings. Appellee filed suit in state court and Debtors filed a chapter 7 petition. Appellee filed an adversary complaint under § 523(a)(2)(A); alternatively, she sought a constructive trust.
After trial, at which several family members testified about the discussions and the breakdown of the parties’ relationship, the bankruptcy court held that Debtors retaining the benefit of Appellee’s payments would constitute unjust enrichment and imposed a constructive trust on the Property in the amount of $92,000. Debtors argued on appeal that the court erred in imposing a constructive trust because, under Idaho law, the Gift Letter conclusively established Appellee’s donative intent and the court’s consideration of other evidence violated Idaho’s parole evidence rule. The BAP found the Idaho parole evidence rule inapplicable here because the Gift Letter was not a written contract between the parties. Under Idaho law, the question of donative intent is one of fact that requires that the court examine all surrounding circumstances and evidence of donative intent, and so the bankruptcy court was not precluded from considering evidence other than the Gift Letter when it determined that Appellee’s contribution of $92,000 was not a gift.
- Judge(s):
- Hon. Scott H. Gann; Hon. Julia W. Brand; Hon. Gary A. Spraker (U.S. Bankruptcy Appellate Panel, Ninth Circuit). Appeal from a ruling by Hon. Joseph M. Meier (Chief Bankruptcy Judge for the District of Idaho)
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary. Please Sign In using your ABI Member credentials. Not a Member yet? Join ABI now - it is absolutely worth it!
