Thomson

Thomson v. Canyon

Good Law
129 Cal. Rptr. 3d 525·198 Cal. App. 4th 594·2011 Cal. App. LEXIS 1082
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 22, 2011No. A129396California5,352 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Sepulveda, J.

The seller of residential property sued her real estate agent and broker upon allegations that the agent failed to prepare proper documentation of the sale. The seller alleged that the sale was meant to “salvage” her home from foreclosure by conveying the property to an investor who would be paid $10,000 to clear the liens, then reconvey the home. The agent allegedly failed to memorialize the oral reconveyance agreement. The buyer purchased the property, refused the seller’s demand for *599 reconveyance, and sold the property to a third party. The seller sued the buyer for fraud but lost at trial. The seller then brought this lawsuit against her real estate agent and broker, alleging negligence and breach of fiduciary duty.

The trial court granted defendants’ motion for judgment on the pleadings (Code Civ. Proc., § 438) based on the statute of limitations (Code Civ. Proc., § 343) and the parol evidence rule (Code Civ. Proc., § 1856), and entered a judgment of dismissal. We reverse the judgment. We conclude that the breach of fiduciary duty cause of action is timely and that the parol evidence rule is inapplicable to the facts presented here. The parol evidence rule does…

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.