Legal Case Summaries
Pennsylvania court determines that it lacks jurisdiction over a California brokerage because there was no evidence demonstrating that the firm’s salesperson was acting on behalf of the brokerage when he flipped a commercial property in Pennsylvania.
Oregon court rules real estate professional did nothing improper in assisting an elderly client complete a section 1031 exchange, even though a number of the investments later failed.
Connecticut appellate court affirms lower court commission award to a real estate professional when the client violated exclusive representation agreement by buying a property while working with another licensee during the term of both representation agreements.
Federal appellate court rules that New Jersey’s property condition disclosure law did not require developer to disclose the personality traits of the buyer’s neighbor, who allegedly harassed the buyer following her purchase of a home from the developer.
New York court reverses lower court decision in favor of broker because of a factual dispute in a case where an individual fell during a showing and then brought a lawsuit for her injuries.
An Ohio court has affirmed a lower court decision awarding a seller $1.2 million that was primarily based on the brokerage’s failure to make timely court filings.
Georgia appellate court affirms ruling that real estate professional did not have a duty to alert former client that someone had called seeking client’s address (caller turned out to be a process server) because the parties were no longer in an agency relationship.
A federal appellate court upheld the dismissal of a lawsuit brought by a New York licensee seeking a commission from a transaction subject to New Jersey law, finding that the state only allowed New Jersey licensees to bring an action for a commission.
Maine court rejects challenger’s argument that the arbitration award should be overturned because the panel had failed to issue findings of fact or conclusions of law.
Louisiana court rules that real estate professional's failure to notify lender about reduced sales price did not affect the buyer's ability to qualify for a loan by the required date and so entered judgment in favor of the real estate professional.