Holmes

Holmes v. Summer

Good Law
116 Cal. Rptr. 3d 419·188 Cal. App. 4th 1510·2010 Cal. App. LEXIS 1728
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaOctober 6, 2010G041906California7,037 words

Opinion

Opinion

Moore, J.

Particularly in these days of rampant foreclosures and short sales, “[t]he manner in which California’s licensed real estate brokers and salesmen conduct business is a matter of public interest and concern. [Citations.]” (Wilson v. Lewis (1980) 106 Cal.App.3d 802, 805-806 [ 165 Cal.Rptr. 396 ].) When the real estate professionals involved in the purchase and sale of a residential' property do not disclose to the buyer that the property is so greatly overencumbered that it is almost certain clear title cannot be conveyed for the agreed-upon price, the transaction is doomed to fail. Not only is the buyer stung, but the marketplace is disrupted and the stream of commerce is impeded. When properties made unsellable by their debt load are listed for sale without appropriate disclosures and sales fall through, purchasers become leery of the marketplace and lenders preparing to extend credit to those purchasers waste valuable time in processing useless loans. In the presently downtrodden economy, it behooves us all for business transactions to come to fruition and for the members of the public to have confidence in real estate agents and brokers.

The case before us presents 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.