- 12 -
At trial, Yang stated that her understanding was that the
ownership of the property was such that "each one gets half."
Upon divorce, "each one gets a half." If Yang predeceased
decedent, then "he will become the executrix[or] or I could will
to him or to the children." In regard to managing the Oak Tree
Inn, Yang and decedent would hire a manager.
The Youngs were informed by real estate brokers that title
should be taken as joint tenancy in order to avoid probate.
However, at trial, Yang testified that she believed she relied on
the broker's advice, but in regard to the Bixby Knolls Hotel,
Yang could not remember whether the real estate broker told the
Youngs to hold title in joint tenancy. Yang testified that they
did not consult an attorney regarding title to the Young
Property. In regard to title, she "[figured] it's -- belong to
both of us."
Petitioner asserts that Yang's testimony at trial is
consistent with her written statements regarding the mutual
understanding and further asserts that no contrary evidence was
presented by respondent. First, we note it is petitioner's
burden to show that the Young Property was held other than as
stated in the deed. We are presented with Yang's statement that
"each one gets half." Petitioner did not present any other
testimony to support Yang's statements. In evaluating her
statements which were translated, we understand the language
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011