For Your Data Sierra Pacific Industries V. Carter Illustration Brief Summary

Sierra Pacific Industries v. Carter 
 

a.       Case History

                                                              i.      Trial courtroom granted a displace for a novel trial, Carter appeals

b.      Facts

                                                              i.      During the autumn of 1975, Sierra purchased the holding inward question

1.      10 field package alongside v duplexes together with two unmarried identify unit of measurement homes

                                                            ii.      Sierra requested Carter, a existent estate agent of 26 years, sell the holding

1.      Carter was familiar alongside the holding having tried to sell it before

                                                          iii.      Both parties agreed that the selling cost would endure $85,000 together with Carter would have $5,000 inward commission

                                                          iv.      The case testimony was inward conflict over what would occur if Carter sold the holding for to a greater extent than than $85,000

                                                            v.      In June of 1976, Carter sold the holding to his immature lady together with son-in-law for $85,000 together with took the $5,000 committee without informing Sierra that he had sold the holding to family

                                                          vi.      Sierra initiated a fraud action

1.      A jury constitute for Carter together with judgment was entered

c.       Ruling

                                                              i.      An agent has a fiduciary duty to divulge to his principle, all data inward his possession relevant to the agency

                                                            ii.      And agent may non compete alongside the regulation or human activity equally an agent for some other political party whose interests mightiness conflict alongside the principle’s

                                                          iii.      A existent estate agent must refrain from dual representation during a sale, unless he has the consent of both principles

1.      This way that a existent estate agent must divulge that the buyer is a identify unit of measurement fellow member if the relation is such that the agent could endure said to endure acquiring an involvement inward the dependent champaign property

                                                          iv.      Carter owed a duty to divulge whom he sold the holding to

                                                            v.      Carter cannot have the commission, together with is liable for a minimum of $5,000

1.      The jury was inward error

                                                          vi.      The guild granting a novel case is affirmed alongside instructions to straight of verdict equally to duty together with breach. The entirely thing for consideration is the sum of damages

Share this post