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.

Contracts
Breach of Fiduciary Duty
Fraud, Failure to Disclose

Judith Bliszcz, et al. v. Albert Goldberg

Published: May 1, 2010 | Result Date: Oct. 30, 2009 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: CIV234437 Verdict –  $1,846,110

Court

Ventura Superior


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Arthur Carvalho Jr.


Defendant

Jeffrey E. Lerman
(Hartsuyker, Stratman & Williams-Abrego)


Experts

Plaintiff

Michael Jewett
(technical)

Jerrel John
(technical)

Defendant

Jerry Tempkin
(technical)

Alan D. Wallace
(technical)

Facts

Defendant Albert Goldberg was a dual agent/broker in plaintiffs' purchase of a ranch property in Fillmore, which they intended to use for an organic hydroponic farming operation. Goldberg was aware that the water well, which historically supplied water to the property and which was located on a separate parcel, had been cut off when the ownership to the two parcels was separated in 2001. Goldberg represented the then-owner of the property and did not disclose these facts to plaintiffs.

After the purchase, plaintiffs discovered that the remaining water well on the property did not function and they were not able to conduct the intended business.

Contentions

PLAINTIFFS' CONTENTIONS:
Plaintiffs contended that Goldberg was negligent, committed fraud, and breached his fiduciary duties by not disclosing the true condition of the water supply to the property.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
Goldberg claimed that he made adequate disclosures sufficient to put plaintiffs on notice that the well located on the property was not suitable for the property.

Settlement Discussions

At trial, plaintiffs demanded $150,000, raised to $400,000. Goldberg offered $105,000, lowered to $60,000.

Result

The jury awarded $300,000 in diminution in value, $21,000 for costs of repair, and $1,525,000 in lost profits.

Deliberation

two days

Poll

12-0 (liability), 9-3 (damages)

Length

four weeks


#120260

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

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