Filed 3/16/22 Shayesteh v. Welch CA4/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115. COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION ONE STATE OF CALIFORNIA MINOO SHAYESTEH, D079462 Plaintiff and Appellant, v. (Super. Ct. No. 2015-1-CV- 282358) NAGIN WELCH, Defendant and Respondent. APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Santa Clara, Sunil R. Kulkarni, Judge. Affirmed. The Law Offices of John H. Perrott and John Henry Perrott for Plaintiff and Appellant. Jensen & McDonald and Edward C. McDonald for Defendant and Respondent. Sisters Minoo Shayesteh and Nagin Welch dispute the ownership of property located at 240 North Cypress Avenue, in Santa Clara, California. Shayesteh maintains she and her sister provided equal funds for the down payment and that they both contributed to the mortgage, property taxes, and maintenance. She filed suit in 2015 to quiet title, among other things. Welch denied Shayesteh’s allegations, and the matter went to trial in 2018. Shayesteh sought to introduce recordings she had made of conversations with her sister about the property. The court excluded one such recording made November 21, 2013 after concluding it regarded settlement negotiations and was inadmissible under Evidence Code1 section 1152, subdivision (a) for purposes of proving liability. Following trial, the court entered judgment in favor of Welch. Shayesteh appeals the judgment, contending the court erred by excluding the November 21, 2013 recording. We conclude the trial court properly excluded the evidence, and we will affirm. I. BACKGROUND AND PROCEDURAL FACTS Shayesteh and Welch are sisters who immigrated to the United States in the late 1970s. Both women married. Shayesteh eventually divorced her husband in 2009 after they were separated for many years. In the early 2000s, Shayesteh feared her husband would somehow take any money she had, even after they were separated, so she looked for a safe place to hide the money. She asked her sister Welch to safeguard or invest the money in real estate on Shayesteh’s behalf. Shayesteh testified that she gave Welch $1,500 each month for safekeeping between 2001 and 2004. She also testified that she gave income tax refunds and child support payments to Welch, and that the funds added up to about $100,000. In 2004, Welch and her husband Timothy2 purchased 240 North Cypress Avenue, Santa Clara, California as an investment property.3 Welch 1 Further section references are to the Evidence Code. 2 We refer to Timothy Welch by his first name to avoid confusion. 2 paid the down payment from her separate money. The house was titled to Welch and Timothy as joint tenants; Shayesteh was not named on the deed but believed her name would be added when Timothy eventually quitclaimed it. Timothy removed his name from the title around 2005 and confirmed the removal …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals