Martinez v. Bank of America National Trust & Savings Ass'n
California Court of Appeal
[Opinion certified for partial publication.*]
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
KITCHING, J.
I
Introduction
This appeal presents the issue whether a bank, which acquires real property through foreclosure but which does not have possession or control of the property, has a duty to inspect the property and remedy its defects. We conclude that the bank has a duty to inspect and remedy defects on the property only if it has actual knowledge of the defects and the ability to prevent foreseeable harm.
In this appeal, defendant bank purchased property in a foreclosure sale. The bank then commenced an unlawful detainer proceeding to attempt to evict the former owners, who…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Rowland v. ChristianCalifornia Supreme Court · 1968
- Ann M. v. Pacific Plaza Shopping CenterCalifornia Supreme Court · 1993
- Ballard v. UribeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1986
- Union Bank v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1995
- Bigbee v. Pacific Telephone & Telegraph Co.California Supreme Court · 1983
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by22 opinions
- Rotolo v. San Jose Sports & Entertainment, LLCCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2007
- Friedman v. Merck & Co.California Court of Appeal · 2003
- CODY F. v. FallettiCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2001
- Madhani v. CooperCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2003
- Laico v. Chevron U.S.A., Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2004
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.