## Facts

- Robert Horton and his second wife, Elizabeth Horton, owned a 223-acre ranch.
- Robert and Elizabeth orally agreed that the survivor would hold all property for life and then devise one-half to plaintiff (Robert’s son) and one-half to relatives selected by Elizabeth.
- In reliance on the oral agreement, the spouses placed their property in joint tenancy, and Robert refrained from making a disposition effective if Elizabeth survived him.
- Robert died, and Elizabeth took full title to the ranch as surviving joint tenant.
- Elizabeth later conveyed the ranch to herself and defendant Norvin R. Kyburz (her relative) as joint tenants.
- Elizabeth died, and Kyburz took full title as surviving joint tenant.
- Plaintiff sued to impose a constructive trust on an undivided one-half interest in the ranch, alleging Elizabeth’s conveyance breached the oral agreement.
- Kyburz asserted he gave good and valuable consideration and took without notice of plaintiff’s alleged equitable interest.

## Issues

1. Whether Kyburz qualified as a bona fide purchaser for value without notice such that he took the ranch free of any constructive-trust equity arising from the spouses’ oral agreement.
2. Whether Kyburz’s consideration could support acquisition of the joint tenancy interest, including survivorship, rather than only a one-half undivided interest.
3. Whether the trial court committed reversible error in evidentiary rulings admitting the decedent’s declarations and will and excluding later evidence of the ranch’s value.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court of California affirmed the judgment for Kyburz.
- Assuming the spouses’ oral agreement could support a constructive trust as between plaintiff and Elizabeth, the court held that Kyburz took free of that equity as a bona fide purchaser for value without notice under the trial court’s supported findings.
- The court rejected plaintiff’s arguments on adequacy of consideration, notice, and the claimed limitation to a one-half interest.
- The court found no reversible error in the challenged evidentiary rulings, and any possible error was nonprejudicial in light of the findings and record.

## Legal Principles

- An oral agreement between spouses regarding disposition of property at death may, on sufficient facts, support a constructive trust in favor of intended beneficiaries.
- A bona fide purchaser for value without notice takes title free of prior equitable interests, including a constructive-trust claim.
- Whether consideration is sufficient and whether a purchaser had actual or constructive notice are fact questions; supported trial-court findings on those matters are binding on appeal.
- A joint tenancy interest includes the right of survivorship; consideration for creation of a joint tenancy may support the survivor’s full title when the survivor is a bona fide purchaser.

## Conclusion

The court upheld title in Kyburz because substantial evidence supported the trial court’s finding that he paid value and lacked notice of plaintiff’s claimed equity; thus, any constructive-trust theory based on the spouses’ oral agreement could not defeat Kyburz’s survivorship title.


Horton v. Kyburz, 346 P.2d 399 (Cal. 1959)