Hale v. Wolfsen
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
Dorothy L. Hale, doing business as California Real Estate, from a judgment, in favor of her principals, respondents Wolfsen, on their cross-complaint for rescission of a real estate transaction that was not completed.
Appellant contends that: 1) the court erred in concluding that she was a subagent of respondents and had violated her fiduciary duty toward them; 2) the evidence does not support the finding that she made material misrepresentations and induced respondents to enter into the transaction; 3) the court erred in failing to make the special findings of fact she requested; and 4) that…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Lingsch v. SavageCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1963
- Sullivan v. HelbingCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1924
- Merrill v. BuckCalifornia Supreme Court · 1962
- Bergtholdt v. Porter Bros.California Supreme Court · 1896
- Crandall v. ParksCalifornia Supreme Court · 1908
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Blickman Turkus v. Mf Downtown SunnyvaleCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2008
- Stortroen v. Beneficial Finance Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1987
- Skopp v. WeaverCalifornia Supreme Court · 1976
- Montoya v. McLeodCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1985
- Ngan Tang Nguyen v. ScottCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1988
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.