Rooz

Rooz v. Kimmel

Good Law
1997 Cal. App. LEXIS 435·55 Cal. App. 2d 573·55 Cal. App. 4th 573·64 Cal. Rptr. 2d 177·97 Daily Journal DAR 7080
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 4, 1997A071398California9,588 words

Opinion

Opinion

Parrilli, J.

In this case we must determine whether a hold harmless agreement absolved North American Title Company (North American) of liability for negligence when North American failed to record a deed of trust in a timely fashion. We conclude the trial court correctly found the hold harmless agreement protected North American. Consequently, we affirm the defense judgment as to North American. However, we also conclude the trial court erred in calculating the amount of damages plaintiff is entitled to recover from another defendant. Consequently, we modify the judgment to permit plaintiff to recover the correct amount of damages ($515,000).

I

Facts

This case arises out of a series of real estate transactions between appellant William B. Rooz and David Kimmel. In late 1989, Rooz exchanged an office building he owned at 1841 Berkeley Way in Berkeley (the Berkeley property) for an office building Kimmel owned at 390 South El Camino Real in San Mateo (the San Mateo property). In this tax deferred exchange, Rooz also received a no interest $445,000 note from Kimmel secured by a deed of trust on the Berkeley property. The note was due in 10 years, or upon the sale of the San Mateo…

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.