Daughter falsely took title of deceased parents’ former home — $350,400 verdict

Type of action: Real Estate

Injuries alleged: Quiet title, tortuous interference and slander of title, punitive damages and attorney’s fees

Name of case: Charles Gregory Breed, Trustee v. Janis Bates Griffin, et al.

Court: Arlington County Circuit Court

Case no.: CL23-4812-01

Tried before: Judge

Name of judge: Judge Louise M. DiMatteo

Date resolved: March 3, 2025

Attorneys for plaintiff: David E. Bateman and Daniel M. Rathbun, Fairfax, Rathbun Bateman P.C.

Description of case: This case involves a dispute over a single-family residential home located in Arlington.

In 1973, Charles W. Griffin, Jr. and his wife, Jacqueline P. Griffin, acquired title to the property. During their lifetime, the Griffins were estranged from their only daughter, the defendant.

On Nov. 23, 2001, the Griffins created and funded an estate plan that included a family trust called “The Griffin Family Trust” pursuant to a certain Declaration of Trust dated Nov. 23, 2001. Under the terms of the trust, the couple named their grandson, the plaintiff, as both the successor trustee upon their demise and primary beneficiary of the trust. They further intentionally and expressly disinherited the defendant in both the will and trust.

Contemporaneously with the execution of the trust on Nov. 23, 2001, the Griffins executed a Virginia quit claim deed conveying the property from them as individuals to themselves as co-trustees of the trust. This deed was subsequently recorded, and the property indexed in the Arlington County land records on April 30, 2002. Thereafter, neither the Griffins nor any successor trustee of the trust ever conveyed the property.

Jacqueline Griffin died on Feb. 7, 2012, leaving her husband as the sole surviving trustee of the trust. On May 17, 2013, he executed three additional estate documents consisting of a last will and testament and two amendments to the trust. Consistent with the prior documents, these new estate documents once again named the plaintiff as the executor of Griffin’s estate and the successor trustee of his trust upon his death. They also reiterated the plaintiff as the sole beneficiary and fully and completely disinherited the defendant.

On June 24, 2016, Griffin, who was 91 at the time, voluntarily resigned as the trustee of the trust and appointed his grandson, the plaintiff, as his successor pursuant to two additional amendments to the trust. Each of these amendments were signed by two separate witnesses and notarized by a notary public. The plaintiff acknowledged his acceptance of the trusteeship from his grandfather in two written acceptances of appointment which were similarly notarized. Charles Griffin died on Dec. 7, 2020.

Upon his appointment, the plaintiff immediately began managing the trust, including managing various real property holdings. Regarding the property in Arlington, the plaintiff, among other things, entered a property management agreement with a property management company under which the property manager managed the lease of the property to tenants. Under the contract, the property manager was also required to collect and remit rent payments derived from the property to the plaintiff.

In December 2019, the property manager negotiated and executed a residential rental and lease agreement with two new tenants for the property. The property manager renegotiated and renewed the lease with the tenants each year until January 2024.

In 2023, the defendant executed a real estate affidavit dated May 1, 2023, which she later recorded in the Arlington County clerk’s office.

Contrary to the trust and contemporaneous deed, the defendants’ affidavit claimed that she had an interest in the property as “the only child of decedents, Charles William Griffin and Jaqueline Perry Griffin.”

Several weeks later, in August 2023, the defendant sent a secret letter to the property manager together with a copy of her affidavit. Relying on the false assertions in her own affidavit, the defendant claimed that the ownership of the property had transferred to her, and she demanded that the property manager provide a copy of the rental contract, owner contract, as well as all accountings of income and disbursements.

When the property manager failed to respond to the first letter, the defendant filed new court documents including a series of pleadings seeking an appointment as the administrator of Griffin’s estate. These filings never disclosed the existence of Griffin’s trust and the express disinheritance of the defendant by the Griffins. As a result of her filings, the defendant qualified as the administrator of the estate.

In the fall 2023, the defendant sent a second letter through her lawyer to the property manager, relying upon her affidavit and her new qualification as the administrator of Griffin’s estate to convince the property manager that she was the owner of the property. The property manager promptly responded to the defendant’s letter by complying with the defendant’s demand for records.

In December 2023, the defendant prepared and executed a putative special warranty deed dated Dec. 5, 2023, purportedly conveying the property from her to herself and her husband, individually. She recorded the special warranty deed in the Arlington County land records.

Around the same time, the defendant informed the property manager that she refused to continue leasing the property to the tenants and demanded that the property manager notify the tenants of the end of their tenancy. The property manager complied with the defendant’s demand by sending a series of emails to the tenants in which it informed the tenants that it would not renew or further lease the property to them.

The tenants asked to continue residing at the property under a month-to-month lease in exchange for an increased monthly rental payment, but at the defendant’s direction, the property manager again refused.

In January 2024, the defendant sent a letter directly to the tenants seeking to coordinate the termination of the tenancy, including transferring the utilities into the name of the defendant and obtaining the keys to the property. At her urging, the property manager also directed the tenants to cooperate with the defendant and turn over the property to her. The defendant personally met with the tenants at the property to obtain the keys and security codes. The tenants then vacated the property.

On the afternoon of Jan. 23, 2024, approximately 24 hours prior to the tenants’ departure from the property, the plaintiff first learned that the property manager terminated its contract with the plaintiff and that the leases with the tenants would not be renewed.

At trial, the court concluded that the property was titled in plaintiff and quieted title in the plaintiff. It further determined that the malicious recording of the false affidavit and fraudulent deed constituted a slander of the plaintiff’s title, and it entered judgment for the plaintiff for $25,600 in compensatory damages, $204,800 in punitive damages, and $120,000 in attorney’s fees.

David E. Bateman, counsel for the plaintiff, provided case information.

[025-T-041]