Karoutas v. HomeFed Bank
California Court of Appeal
232 Cal. App. 3d 767, 283 Cal. Rptr. 809 (1991)
- Written by Whitney Kamerzel , JD
Facts
HomeFed Bank (defendant) was the successor-in-interest beneficiary under a deed of trust of property owned by Michael and Sandra Lawrence. The Lawrences defaulted on their loan, and HomeFed’s predecessor in interest initiated its power to sell the property. Before the sale, the Lawrences told HomeFed that the property had significant soil damage, which would cost more than $350,000 to repair. At the sale, HomeFed bid against George and Anastasios Karoutas (plaintiffs) for the property, but the Karoutases won the property for $155,001. The Karoutases soon discovered the significant soil damage and sued HomeFed for rescission and declaratory relief due to fraud and negligent nondisclosure. The trial court granted HomeFed’s motion to dismiss because the Karoutases could not identify a duty that required HomeFed to disclose the defects to the Karoutases. The Karoutases appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Chin, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 805,000 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.
