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 Contract
Breach of Fiduciary Duty

Jolene C. Clayton v. Marin Mortgage Bankers Corporation, Charles J. Flynn, Mik P. Flynn, Glenn H. Larsen

Published: Aug. 17, 2013 | Result Date: Feb. 7, 2013 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: CIV 1101598 Verdict –  $150,000

Court

Marin Superior


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Patrick M. Macias


Defendant

Daryoosh Khashayar
(Khashayar Law Group)


Experts

Plaintiff

Arlen Mills
(technical)

Defendant

S. Guy Puccio
(technical)

Facts

In 2006, Jolene Clayton invested $150,000 in a promissory note and deed of trust for a loan. The loan was secured by three different properties in San Francisco. Clayton entered into the investment with Marin Mortgage Bankers Corp, Charles Flynn, and the original owners of the note and deed of trust. Clayton later claimed that as a result of significant problems and other failures, her investment was lost.

Clayton sued Marin Mortgage, Charles Flynn, and others, alleging that their actions constituted a violation of California Securities Laws, Corporations Code Section 25401, a breach of fiduciary duty, negligence, constructive fraud, and misrepresentation.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
Clayton argued that the manner in which the investment was packaged and marketed was fraudulent and misrepresentative. She claimed that the defendants did not disclose material facts and overstated the value of the property securing the loan, causing her to lose her investment.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
The defendants argued that, based on the valuation of the property, there was no fraud or misrepresentation.

Result

Trial court awarded directed verdict on the Securities Law causes of action, jury found defendants guilty of breach of fiduciary duty, negligence and negligent misrepresentation. Plaintiff obtained judgment for $150,000, plus costs of suit, including costs under CCP 998 and attorney fees.

Deliberation

three hours

Length

seven days


#93679

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

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