Legal Opinion
Fragale v. Faulkner
California Court of Appeal
Decided July 7, 2003No. B153654PublishedCited by 16 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
BOLAND, J.
SUMMARY
The measure of damages for a real estate broker’s intentional misrepresentation to a buyer for whom he acts as agent is not limited to the out-of-pocket losses suffered by the buyer. Because the broker is a fiduciary, damages for intentional fraud may be measured by the broader benefit-of-the-bargain rule.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
Tim and Dinora Fragale purchased a home in Long Beach in 1998, and several months later filed this lawsuit against the seller, Earlene L. Faulkner. The complaint alleged two fraud causes of action, for intentional and negligent…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Alliance Mortgage Co. v. RothwellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1995
- Gagne v. BertranCalifornia Supreme Court · 1954
- Salahutdin v. Valley of California, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1994
- Saunders v. TaylorCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1996
- Overgaard v. JohnsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1977
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Henry v. Lehman Commercial Paper, Inc. (In Re First Alliance Mortgage Co.)Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2006
- Henry v. Lehman Commercial Paper, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2006
- OCM Principal Opportunities Fund, L.P. v. CIBC World Markets Corp.California Court of Appeal · 2007
- Strebel v. Brenlar Investments, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2006
- Gravillis v. Coldwell Banker Residential Brokerage Co.California Court of Appeal · 2010
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.