Rangel v. Denny Case Brief Summary | Law Case Explained
Get more case briefs explained with Quimbee. Quimbee has over 36,300 case briefs (and counting) keyed to 984 casebooks ► https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-overview
Rangel v. Denny | 104 So. 3d 68 (2012)
Generally, a real estate broker has a fiduciary duty to exercise reasonable care, skill, and diligence in representing clients. In Rangel versus Denny, the Louisiana Court of Appeal considered whether a client could assert a cause of action against a real estate broker for breaching its fiduciary duties.
In February of 2010, Anthony Bryan and Bridgette Rangel entered into a contract with real estate broker J. Wesley Dowling and Associates. Under the contract, Dowling was to sell the Rangels’ house located on 40 acres in DeSoto Parish, Louisiana, in exchange for a commission. The sale of the property was to include the mineral rights to 20 acres, and the Rangels were to retain the mineral rights to the remaining 20 acres.
Under the contract, the Rangels were to inform Dowling if a prospective buyer contacted them directly.
In July of 2010, the Rangels were contacted by Marlon and Cynthia Curtis about purchasing the property. The Rangels then notified Dowling about the Curtises’ inquiry and requested that it provide them with a prospective buyer’s contract. But Dowling didn’t do so.
One of the Rangels then personally drafted an agreement for the Curtises to purchase the property. But before the Curtises received a loan, the Rangels moved out and signed a 6-month apartment lease.
A few months later, the Curtises were unable to obtain financing for the purchase and backed out of the agreement.
Subsequently, the Rangels hired Bryce Denny to represent them in suing Dowling and the Curtises. However, the Rangels later hired new counsel and filed an action against Denny, Dowling, and the Curtises in state district court for negligence and breach of contract.
In the action, the Rangels alleged that Dowling breached its fiduciary duty to them by failing to take several actions. These actions included helping to negotiate the sale, using a state-approved contract form, reviewing all purchase orders, following up on details of the sale, discussing financing options, and helping both parties successfully conclude the sale. In response, Dowling filed an exception of no cause of action, which the court sustained and then dismissed the case with prejudice. The Rangels appealed to the Louisiana Court of Appeal.
Want more details on this case? Get the rule of law, issues, holding and reasonings, and more case facts here: https://www.quimbee.com/cases/rangel-v-denny
The Quimbee App features over 36,300 case briefs keyed to 984 casebooks. Try it free for 7 days! ► https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-overview
Have Questions about this Case? Submit your questions and get answers from a real attorney here: https://www.quimbee.com/cases/rangel-v-denny
Did we just become best friends? Stay connected to Quimbee here:
Subscribe to our YouTube Channel ► https://www.youtube.com/subscription_center?add_user=QuimbeeDotCom
Quimbee Case Brief App ► https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-overview
Facebook ► https://www.facebook.com/quimbeedotcom/
Twitter ► https://twitter.com/quimbeedotcom
#casebriefs #lawcases #casesummaries
source