Appellate Court Remands Trial Decision Invalidating a Deed Due to Insufficient Trial Record With Regard to Statute of Limitations
In re Estate of Guirguess, Docket No. A-3607-23, 2025 WL 3562540 (N.J. Super. App. Div. Dec. 12, 2025)
The decedent had three children. The decedent and one of his sons (a minor) were named as defendants in a personal injury suit in 1997. Shortly before that matter went to trial, the decedent transferred real property to another son, David, in 2000.
After that lawsuit was settled in 2001, David did not transfer the property back to the decedent.
David was also a joint owner of the decedent’s checking and savings accounts and, starting in 2020, he began to transfer money from those accounts to his own account. However, he also testified that he returned a substantial portion of those funds.
Meanwhile, in 2005, decedent executed a will naming his daughter as executor, leaving his company to his daughter’s then husband, and bequeathing the residuary estate to all three children.
The decedent died in 2022. His daughter, as the executor of the estate, filed a complaint against David challenging the transfers and claiming fraud and conversion.
David testified the real property was a gift. He asserted that the property remained in his name and he managed rentals, made improvements, and paid expenses out of his own pocket.
David also argued that the six-year statute of limitations barred the claims, under N.J.S.A. §2A:14-1(a). He further contended that under N.J.S.A. §2A:14-6 and -7, a twenty-year statute of limitations applied to protect the real estate transfer. He also relied on the fact that the decedent had never filed a claim to void the transfer. In sum, David argued that the transfer had occurred over twenty years ago, in 2000. His sister as executor had not filed the litigation until 2022.
David’s siblings testified that the real estate transfer was not a gift or sale, and instead that it was transferred to protect the property from a judgment in the lawsuit and that the decedent repeatedly asked for its return. They also testified that several times, at the decedent’s request, deeds were prepared to transfer the property back to the decedent, but David refused to sign the deeds.
The trial court found David’s testimony not credible and found his siblings to be credible. The court voided the deed and deemed the funds part of the estate, without addressing the statute of limitations.
David appealed. The Appellate Division found the record and findings at trial were insufficient. The trial court failed to address the statute of limitations. The appeals court also determined that the trial court mistakenly used its discretion in disregarding David’s repayment as to the jointly owned account. As a result, the case was reversed and remanded.