John F. Bright, individually, and as Trustee of the John F. Bright Family Trust, dated April 24, 1994
Published: Aug. 19, 2000 | Result Date: Feb. 4, 2000 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |Case number: 97AS06021 Bench Decision – $0
Judge
Court
Sacramento Superior
Attorneys
Plaintiff
Defendant
Experts
Plaintiff
Gary Azevedo
(technical)
Frank La Bella Jr.
(technical)
Michael Ratiani
(technical)
Defendant
Ron Larson
(technical)
William Watson Jr.
(technical)
Facts
For several years, the plaintiff, a real estate investor, engaged defendant John Nixon, a licensed real estate broker,
to find investment opportunities. Nixon was employed by the defendants Central Pacific Mortgage (CPM) and
John Courson. Nixon brokered 28 "hard money" mortgage loans from the plaintiff to borrowers who were
unable to qualify for more conventional mortgage financing.
In February 1995, Nixon brokered a loan from the plaintiff to a husband and wife, Dr. and Mrs. John Richards,
for $86,000, so they could purchase 37 acres of unimproved property in Oroville to develop a mobile home
park. Defendant Shorter Rankin appraised the property at $585,000 if zoned residential, and $725,000 if zoned
as a mobile home park. The plaintiffÆs loan was secured by a second deed of trust in the property, behind a first
deed of trust in the amount of $115,000.
In 1996, the RichardsÆ defaulted on their loan, and the plaintiff foreclosed on the property. At the trusteeÆs sale
in 1997, the plaintiff acquired the property with a credit bid of $106,954, subject to the first deed of trust.
Shortly thereafter, the plaintiff ordered another appraisal. The second appraisal valued the property at $85,000.
Based on that appraisal, the plaintiff stopped making payments to the first trust deed holder, who foreclosed on
the plaintiffÆs interest in the property.
Settlement Discussions
The plaintiff demanded $140,000. Defendants CPM and Courson offered $20,000. Defendant Nixon made no offers.
Damages
$470,000 in contract damages (benefit of the bargain) plus $90,000 in fees and commissions paid.
Other Information
Defense counsel reported that the judge found the defense experts more credible than plaintiff's experts because plaintiff's expert appraisers arrived at their values based on erroneous assumptions as to the propety's zoning and permitted uses.
For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:
Email
jeremy@reprintpros.com
for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390