This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Real Property
Professional Negligence
Appraisal

The Money Store Investment Corp. v. Ramona Commerce Center

Published: Mar. 8, 2001 | Result Date: Dec. 29, 2000 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: 318171 Bench Decision –  $0

Judge

Charles D. Field

Court

Riverside Superior


Attorneys

Experts

Facts

The defendant/cross-complainant was a limited partnership that was formed in 1990 to purchase 14 acres of
vacant land in San Jacinto. The property was not developed until 1994, when construction on a golf driving
range facility began. This was to be an interim use until the economy allowed for more profitable use.
The financing for the purchase from 1990 was due in full at the end of 1994 and the partnership applied for an
$850,000 loan from The Money Store to pay off the note.
The Money Store hired cross-defendant Thomas Heath to appraise the subject property. Heath concluded in his
report that the nearly completed golf driving range was not an economically feasible use of the property. He
appraised the property as vacant land for $2.2 million as of December 1994. The original 1990 purchase price
by the partnership was $1,295,000.
The loan was issued by the Money Store and after approximately one year of operating the golf driving range,
the partnership defaulted on the loan. The Money Store instituted a judicial foreclosure action against the
partnership and sought to enforce a personal guarantee against one of the general partners.
A settlement was reached between The Money Store and the partnership which allowed the subject property to
be sold to a third party with all sale proceeds being paid to The Money Store. An additional payment of
$264,000 was paid by the partnership to settle the main action.
The partnership sued Heath in a cross-complaint asserting causes of action for negligence, breach of contract
and negligent misrepresentation.

Settlement Discussions

The cross-defendant offered $25,000, but the cross-complainant demanded $200,000.

Damages

The cross-complainant claimed damages of $400,000 for the settlement paid in the main action, business and real property expenses.

Other Information

The trial court ruled in the cross-defendantÆs favor based on the lack of evidence to establish reliance on the report.


#107025

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390