Holmes v. Summer
California Court of Appeal, Fourth District
116 Cal. Rptr. 3d 419 (2010)
- Written by Rich Walter, JD
Facts
This case arose at a time when rampant foreclosures and short sales created general disruption in the real estate marketplace. Sieglinde Summer (defendant) was the real estate sales agent who represented the sellers of a residential property that Phil and Jenille Holmes (plaintiffs) contracted to buy. The sale failed to close. The Holmeses, who consequently suffered financial losses because they had sold their old house in order to finance the transaction, sued Summer for damages. The trial evidence showed that, when she presented the contract to the Holmeses, Summer knew but failed to disclose that the property was encumbered by mortgages totaling far more than its sale price, and that the transaction was doomed to fail because neither the sellers nor their lenders were prepared to make up the difference. The trial court ruled that Summer owed no duty of disclosure to the Holmeses and dismissed the suit. The Holmeses appealed to the California Court of Appeal.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Moore, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 802,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
