Hart bought a newly constructed home developed and built by Brookfield. Several years later, a pipe in the home’s sprinkler system burst, causing flooding and significant damage. Brookfield acknowledged liability and repaired the damage. Hart’s homeowners’ insurer, Liberty Mutual, paid his hotel and relocation expenses incurred while he was out of the home during the […]
Subcontractor Without California License Not Barred From Collecting For Work On Federal Project
/by Peterson, Martin & Reynolds LLPSubcontractor Without California License Not Barred From Collecting For Work On Federal Project – K. Nina Reynolds In general, California law prohibits an unlicensed contractor from bringing an action to recover payment for work that requires a license. (Bus. & Prof. Code § 7031 (“Section 7031”).) Two recent cases have addressed Section 7031. As […]
Represented real estate professionals in commission disputes
/by Peterson, Martin & Reynolds LLPRepresented general contractor in breach of contract suit against property owners
/by Peterson, Martin & Reynolds LLPListing Broker Not Liable to Buyer for Validity of Outdated Geologist’s Report
/by Peterson, Martin & Reynolds LLPListing Broker Not Liable to Buyer for Validity of Outdated Geologist’s Report – Henry Walker This case, Saffie v. Schmeling, stems from statements in a Multiple Listing Service (“MLS”) listing regarding the development potential of a commercial lot in an earthquake zone in Riverside County. The listing broker included statements in the MLS listing […]
Scope of Easement Limited to Historical Use
/by Peterson, Martin & Reynolds LLPScope of Easement Limited to Historical Use – M. Henry Walker This case involved the determination of the scope of an easement over property in Kings Beach, Lake Tahoe. Plaintiffs Rye, owners of the property (i.e., the “servient tenement”), sued defendant Tahoe Truckee Sierra Disposal Company to prevent expansion of the easement historically used for […]
Buyer Sufficiently Alleged That Purchase Agreement Provision Calling for Nonrefundable Deposit Was Unenforceable
/by Peterson, Martin & Reynolds LLPBuyer Sufficiently Alleged That Purchase Agreement Provision Calling for Nonrefundable Deposit Was Unenforceable – K. Nina Reynolds Buyer contracted to buy a mobile home park in Sunnyvale, California. Buyer delivered a $3 million deposit directly to seller, which the contract provided was nonrefundable unless seller materially breached the purchase agreement or failed or refused […]
Sellers Required to Provide Transfer Disclosure Statements to Buyers of Mixed-Use Properties
/by Peterson, Martin & Reynolds LLPSellers Required to Provide Transfer Disclosure Statements to Buyers of Mixed-Use Properties – Jonathan Finke In Richman v. Hartley, Hartley entered into a written agreement with Richman to purchase a single parcel of real property (the “Property”) owned by Richman containing two structures, a residential duplex and a commercial building. Under a simultaneously executed […]
Right to Repair Act Not Exclusive Remedy Where Construction Defects Cause Actual Damages
/by Peterson, Martin & Reynolds LLPHart bought a newly constructed home developed and built by Brookfield. Several years later, a pipe in the home’s sprinkler system burst, causing flooding and significant damage. Brookfield acknowledged liability and repaired the damage. Hart’s homeowners’ insurer, Liberty Mutual, paid his hotel and relocation expenses incurred while he was out of the home during the […]
Real Estate Agent’s Fraud Cannot Be Imputed to Broker for Exception to Bankruptcy Discharge, Unless Broker Knew or Should Have Known of the Fraud
/by Peterson, Martin & Reynolds LLPReal Estate Agent’s Fraud Cannot Be Imputed to Broker for Exception to Bankruptcy Discharge, Unless Broker Knew or Should Have Known of the Fraud – Angela Okamura The case of In re Huh examines whether a finding of fraud against a real estate agent can be imputed to the broker in a bankruptcy context. […]