Kim

Suk Yong Kim v. Sumitomo Bank

Bad Law
17 Cal. App. 4th 974·1993 Cal. App. LEXIS 823·21 Cal. Rptr. 2d 834·93 Daily Journal DAR 10258·93 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 6003
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 21, 1993B060571California3,236 words

Opinion

Opinion

Woods, J.

Plaintiffs appeal from a summary judgment granted in favor of defendant, contending that defendant violated various duties it owed plaintiffs, who had taken out a construction loan from defendant. Defendant appeals from the order denying its motion for attorney fees. We affirm the judgment and reverse the order.

Factual and Procedural Synopsis

I. Factual background

In February 1985, plaintiffs Suk Yong Kim and Ok Sun Kim (Kims) entered into a construction contract with Jonathan Pae to build an apartment building on property they owned in Los Angeles.

On August 6, 1985, the Kims obtained a construction loan from defendant Sumitomo Bank of California (Bank). In connection with the loan, the Kims signed a promissory note, executed a deed of trust in favor of the Bank, and entered into a construction loan agreement (Loan Agreement) with the Bank.

About the same time, the Kims also entered into a joint control agreement (Control Agreement) with Pae and defendant Builders Disbursements, Inc. (BDI), whereby BDI agreed to periodically disburse funds to the contractor upon the contractor’s instruction. The funds to be disbursed were to come from the Bank loan.

The Bank was…

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.