Legal Opinion

Carleton v. Tortosa

California Court of Appeal

Decided March 25, 1993No. C013153PublishedCited by 23 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

SCOTLAND, J.

This case presents the question whether a real estate broker had a duty to advise her client that the client’s real estate transactions could have adverse tax consequences.

Plaintiff Ernest Carleton, an experienced real estate investor, employed defendant Mary Tortosa, a real estate broker, in the sale of two residential rental properties and the purchase of two residential rental properties. Plaintiff executed listing agreements, real estate disclosure statements, and real estate purchase contracts which advised him that defendant’s responsibilities as a broker did not…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. Tunkl v. Regents of University of CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1963
  2. People v. HardyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1992
  3. People v. HillCalifornia Supreme Court · 1974
  4. Ballard v. UribeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1986
  5. People v. DeVaughnCalifornia Supreme Court · 1977

16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by23 opinions

  1. Pardee Construction Co. v. Insurance of the WestCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2000
  2. Campbell v. Scripps BankCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2000
  3. League for Protection of Oakland's Architectural & Historic Resources v. City of OaklandCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1997
  4. Pagano v. KrohnCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1997
  5. Felmlee v. Falcon Cable TVCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1995

18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API