Under the rule announced in Muktarian v. Barmby (1965) 63 Cal.2d 558, the statute of limitations does not start to run on a quiet title action so long as the plaintiff remains in possession of the premises, even if plaintiff is aware of conflicting claims against the property, so long as the conflicting claims are not pressed against him. In Ankoanda v. Walker-Smith (1996) 44 Cal.App.4th 610, the court said that Muktarian applied only when the plaintiff was in “exclusive and undisputed possession,” but this decision holds that the Supreme Court has never approved that limitation on Muktarian. Here, a much older man granted his live-in girlfriend a half interest in his condominium on the assumption she would marry him. When that didn’t happen, he sued to quiet title by revoking his gift in contemplation of marriage under Civ. Code 1590. This decision holds that the quiet title action was timely, though brought more than five years after the grant deed, because plaintiff had remained in possession the whole time and defendant had not pressed her claim to half ownership until shortly before suit was filed. It didn’t matter that defendant had lived in the condo part of the time after the grant deed or that plaintiff based his quiet title claim on revoking a gift in contemplation of marriage.