Brandt v. Nat. One Mortgage
Plaintiff and appellant Anita Brandt (Brandt), a real estate lender, brought this action for fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, constructive fraud, and unfair business practices against real estate brokers and salespersons involved in a loan transaction. She also sued the borrowers for nonpayment.
Following a court trial, the trial court ruled that one person, Shannon Grant (Grant),[1] was the broker for the loan within the meaning of Business and Professions Code[2] section 10232.4.[3] The trial court further ruled that defendant and respondent Jeffrey Maas (Maas) and Earl William Dexter (Dexter)[4] were not brokers for the transaction within the meaning of the section. It also ruled that Maas and defendant and respondent National One Mortgage (National One) had “no broker/princip[al] relationship†with Brandt.
Brandt appeals, arguing that the trial court erred in its application of the law to the facts. Maas and National One (collectively, respondents) respond by arguing that section 10323.4[5] does not apply because they only represented the borrowers and did not solicit the lender, Brandt.[6] Defendants and respondents Mary and Terry Epley did not file a brief.
Comments on Brandt v. Nat. One Mortgage