List of Cases Cited in Mcle Self-study Article

• Publication year: 2018

List of Cases Cited in MCLE Self-Study Article

Date	Case Name	Case Citation	Plaintiff (Buyer Or Seller)	Defendant (Listing Broker, Buyer's Broker Or Seller)	Decision (Pro-Plaintiff Or Pro-Defendant)	Ruling	Notable Negative Treatment
1963	Lingsch v. Savage	213 Cal. App.2d. 729	Buyer	Listing Broker	Pro Plaintiff	Seller and broker have duty to disclose to buyer material facts, affecting the value or desirability of the property, which are known to or accessible only to them, and the defendant knows that such facts are not known to or within the diligent attention and observation of buyer.	1. Blickman Turkus, LP v. MF Downtown Sunnyvale, LLC, 162 Cal.App.4th 858, 875 (2008) Duty to disclose specifically applies to the seller and seller's agent to disclose to buyer in a purchase of residential real property.; 2. Driver v. Melone, 11 Cal.App.3d 746, 753 (1970) Facts held to not satisfy the fraud elements laid out in Lingsch because appellant was skilled in dealing in real estate, and the material information was readily accessible to the appellant.
1976	Cooper v. Jevne	56 Cal App 3d 860	Buyer	Listing Broker	Pro Plaintiff	Broker representing seller is liable to buyer for negative fraud or deceit if broker knows facts materially affecting the value or desirability of the property et cet.	1. Blickman Turkus, LP v. MF Downtown Sunnyvale, LLC, 162 Cal.App.4th 858, 875 (2008) Duty to disclose specifically applies to the seller and seller's agent for the benefit of the buyer in a purchase of residential real property; 2. Harshbarger v. City of Colton, 197 Cal. App.3d 1335, 1345 (1988) Although public employees may be liable for fraudulent inspections, public entities are generally immune from liability to purchasers except for intentional misrepresentation amounting to actual fraud.

[Page 26]

1983	Reed v. King	145 Cal. App. 3d 261	Buyer	Listing Broker and Seller	Pro Plaintiff	Seller duty to disclose material fact not limited to physical impairments. Ill-repute, bad will, or stigma may affect market value. Same rules re: known to seller and unknown to buyer as above. "The ancient maxim caveat emptor (let the buyer beware) has little or no application to California real estate transactions."	Hinesley v. Oakshade Town Ctr., 135 Cal. App.4th 289, 303 (2005) Although abuyer may not have an independent obligation to question a seller about a material facts, not asking may be used as evidence of the buyers state of mind, showing that he was not relying on certain facts in deciding whether to buy/lease the property.
1984	Easton v. Strassburger	152 Cal. App.3d 90	Buyer	Listing Broker	Pro Plaintiff	Simple negligence by broker. Listing broker owes buyer a duty of care to disclose material facts which, through reasonable diligence, should have been known. No actual knowledge required. Duty to conduct a reasonably competent and diligent inspection of residential property listed and to disclose material facts affecting value or desirability that such an investigation would reveal. Relies on NAR Code of Ethics, "affirmative obligation to discover adverse factors."	Blickman Turkus, LP v. MF Downtown Sunnyvale, LLC, 162 Cal.App.4th 858, 875 (2008) Listing brokers duty of inspection and disclosure to buyer discussed in Easton does not apply in the commercial context, where buyers are likely to be more experienced and sophisticated.
1985	Visual Inspection and Disclosure Law Enacted					Stats 1985, c. 223, § 2 added Sections 2079 et seq. to the Civil Code requiring a broker listing a 1-4 unit residential property to conduct a "reasonably competent and diligent visual inspection of the property offered for sale" and disclose all facts materially affecting the value of desirability of the property that such an investigation would reveal.
1985	Transfer Disclosure Law Enacted					Stats 1985, c. 1574, § 2, (operative Jan. 1, 1987) added Sections 1102 et seq. to the Civil Code requiring the transferor of real property to deliver written transfer disclosure statement (TDS) form (included in § CC 1102.6) to the transferee as soon as practicable before the transfer of title.

[Page 27]

1986	Agency Disclosure Law Enacted					Stats 1986, c. 785 §§ 3-4 added §§ 2373 et seq. to the Civil Code requiring listing and selling agents to provide buyers and sellers with real estate agency relationship disclosure forms clarifying agency relationships in transactions. Agency disclosure provisions were moved to Civil Code §§ 2079.12 et seq. by Senate Bill 476 (1995).
1989	Smith v. Rickard	205 Cal. App.3d 1354	Buyer	Listing Brokers (dual agents)	Pro-Defendant	Broker duty of inspection and disclosure under Civil Code § 2079 does not apply to commercial portion of mixed use property. (Note that court found there could be a cause of action against broker as a fiduciary—dual agent—but that cause of action was not before the jury.)	Richman v. Hartley, 224 Cal. App. 4th 1182, 1191 (2014) While § 2079's inspection

...