Legal Case Summaries
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.
Federal appellate court reversed trial court’s summary judgment, allowing resident to pursue claim that city’s failure to make reasonable accommodation to municipal ordinance and permit resident to keep a miniature horse as a service animal on resident’s property was in violation of the ADA and FHA.
Wisconsin appellate court reverses trial court and affirms jury's award to buyer when the broker failed to include documents signed by the parties in the closing documents.
Illinois appellate court rules that owner breached listing agreement when it conducted secret negotiations with a buyer that the broker had introduced to the property.
A recent RESPA enforcement action by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau has caused concerns about the Bureau's interpretation of RESPA, including the section 8(c)(2) exemption that allows fair market value payments to settlement service providers for services provided.
Court rules that failure to attach a dual agency consent form to purchase and sale agreement did not invalidate the contract, despite the fact that the contract’s terms required that the form be attached.