Wallace

Wallace v. Onate

Good Law
1991 Cal. App. LEXIS 1505·2 Cal. App. 4th 549·3 Cal. Rptr. 2d 3·92 Daily Journal DAR 560·92 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 401
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 9, 1991B056022California1,632 words

Opinion

Opinion

Klein, J.

Defendant and appellant Laura Onate (Onate) appeals a judgment in favor of plaintiff and respondent Real Estate Commissioner of the State of California (the Commissioner).

The essential issue presented is whether Onate, a real estate licensee, is an aggrieved person so as to be entitled to payment from the Recovery Account.

Because Onate is not within the class protected by the Recovery Account, the judgment is affirmed.

Factual and Procedural Background

In November 1986, Onate obtained four offers and deposits from four clients for the purchase of “bargain” real properties offered for sale by Donald Joseph Smith (Smith), also a real estate licensee. Onate submitted the offers and deposits totalling $14,000 to Smith, who converted the money for his own use.

Afraid she might be sued, Onate paid her clients in full for their losses, obtained assignments from them, filed an action in the municipal court and obtained a default judgment against Smith. She thereafter filed an application for payment against the Recovery Account.

In September 1988, the Commissioner filed a complaint in the superior court for adjudication and proration of claims for payment from the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.