Real estate business court cases

Category:

Description

Real estate business court cases is one of the most important businesses in many part of California, which effect to every people who are living here. Real estate salesman is a person who pays an important role between property broker and seller. This duty also includes offering, negotiating, filling an application etc. However, sometime people including broker and salesman themselves confuse in their duty, responsibility and their compensation. Hence, the code for real estate salesman is very interested.

 

 

Legislation

 

* THIS SECTION IS CURRENT THROUGH THE 2003 SUPPLEMENT (2001-2002 SESSION) * 
INCLUDING ALL URGENCY LEGISLATION THROUGH 2003 REG. SESS. CH. 909, 10/12/03 
1ST EXTRA SESS. CH. 13X, 8/2/03 AND 2ND EXTRA SESS. CH. 1XX, 2/20/03

 

BUSINESS & PROFESSIONS CODE   
DIVISION 4. Real Estate   
PART 1. Licensing of Persons   
CHAPTER 3. Real Estate Regulations   
ARTICLE 1. Scope of Regulation

 

GO TO CALIFORNIA CODES ARCHIVE Directory-real estate business court cases

 

Cal Bus & Prof Code  10132 (2003)

10132.  “Real estate salesman” 

   A real estate salesman within the meaning of this part is a natural person who, for a compensation or in expectation of a compensation, is employed by a licensed real estate broker to do one or more of the acts set forth in Sections 10131, 10131.1, 10131.2, 10131.3, 10131.4, and 10131.6.

 

 

Rational

 

Real estate broker and real estate salesman belong in different categories.   Broker, because of his superior knowledge, experience and proven stability, is authorized to deal with public, contract with its members and collect money from them; whereas salesman is strictly agent of broker, cannot contract in his own name, and cannot accept money from any person other than broker under whom he is licensed. 
         Real estate salesman can act only for, or on behalf of, and in place of broker under whom he is licensed; his acts are limited to those that he does and performs as agent for such broker.

Real estate salesman, so far as his relationship with broker who employs salesman is concerned, cannot be classed as independent contractor; any contract that purports to change that relationship from that of agent to independent contractor is invalid as being contrary to provisions of Real Estate Law.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Brief Case

 

Case: GERALD RESNIK, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. ANDERSON AND MILES, Defendant and Appellant

Court of Appeal of California, Second Appellate District, Division One 109 Cal. App. 3d 569; 167 Cal. Rptr. 340; 1980 Cal. App. LEXIS 2186

 

Facts:Real estate business court cases

Plaintiff, who worked for defendant as a licensed real estate salesman pursuant to a written contract, filed a claim for recovery of an unpaid commission with the California Labor Commissioner. The commissioner awarded plaintiff the amount of indebtedness and defendant filed an appeal de novo pursuant to Lab. Code, 98.2, in the superior court (State of California Department of Motor Vehicles, 2016). Defendant claimed plaintiff was not an employee, and, while the trial court found that plaintiff’s contract with defendant stated a relationship of independent contractor, and that plaintiff was also engaged as a full-time employee with a bank during his association with defendant, it entered judgment for plaintiff.

 

 

Issue:

Can a salesman be classified as independent contractor, insofar as his relationship with his broker is concerned?

 

Rule:

A bona fide contractor is customarily engaged in an independently established business and retains the right to control the manner in which he performs his contract (Lab. Code, ง 2750.5). An employee, on the other hand, is subject to the absolute control and direction of his employer. An employee may be classified as either a servant or an agent, but both convey the notion of action taken under employment and express the idea of service.

 

Analysis:

Accordingly, the court held that a salesman, insofar as his relationship with his broker is concerned, could not be classified as an independent contractor, and any contract which purported to change that relationship was invalid as being contrary to law.

 

Conclusion:Real estate business court cases

A salesman cannot be classified as an independent contractor.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Brief Case

 

Case: MARIN COUNTY BOARD OF REALTORS, INC., Plaintiff, Cross-defendant and Respondent, v. EUGENE PALSSON, Defendant, Cross-complainant and Appellant

Supreme Court of California 16 Cal. 3d 920; 549 P.2d 833; 130 Cal. Rptr. 1; 1976 Cal. LEXIS 268; 1976-1 Trade Cas. (CCH) P60,898

 

Fact:

A county board of realtors, composed of 75 percent of the brokers actively engaged in selling residential real property in a county, limited its membership to persons primarily engaged in the real estate business, and denied to nonmembers access to its multiple listing service. A part-time licensed real estate salesman, who had been denied membership in the board on the ground he was not primarily engaged in the real estate business, contested the board’s decision, after which the board filed an action seeking a declaration that the exclusion was valid. The salesman filed a cross-complaint seeking declaratory relief, injunctions granting him board membership and access to the multiple listing service, and damages. After a nonjury trial, the trial court ruled in favor of the board on all issues, finding that the regulations in question were reasonable.

 

Issue:Real estate business court cases

Should the judgment reverse?

 

Rule:

Cartwright Act prohibits agreements among individuals or companies that restrain trade.

 

Analysis:

The Marin County Board of Realtors has violated the Cartwright Act (Bus. & Prof. Code, 16720, 16726) by limiting its membership to persons primarily engaged in the real estate business and by denying nonmembers access to its multiple listing service.

 

Conclusion:Real estate business court cases

The judgment is reversed.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Conclusion

Social impact of the legislation

 

The consequence of this code has the advantages for both real estate broker and salesman. This code states the duty and responsibility of both parties clearly. It is used as a guide line clearly. Therefore, there is no confused between real estate broker and salesman (Arnold Law Firm, 2016). People can understand and use the party in a right duty. Salesman will no more make a mistake or do an activity out of his or her responsibility. Moreover, broker will know either his or her scope and salesman scope. They will not do a same task with the others anymore.

 

Personal opinion-real estate business court cases

 

In my opinion, this code reflects the problem of people who are living in a same community because it shows that two parties working together can do a same duty. However, the code is very important because real estate business affect every people (Kraut Law Group, 2017). Classification of the duty and responsibility for both parties gives a vision of working area clearly. This code reduces a problem between two parties and also makes a court lower load than before. It is also useful for a person who wants to decide whether he or she wants to be a broker or salesman in the future or someone who commit to do a task, which related to this field. However, in the future, the society is changing all the time. This code can be changed or added some regulation to suitable in a community (Ehline Law Firm, 2017).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

References

Arnold Law Firm. (2016, June 12). Traffic Signal Accident Lawsuits in Carlifornia. Retrieved from Arnold Law Firm: https://www.justice4you.com/failure-to-stop-accidents.html

Ehline Law Firm. (2017, December 4). Important California Car Accident Laws/ Scenarios. Retrieved from Ehline Law Firm: Personal Injury Attorneys: https://losangelesaccidentpersonalinjury.attorney/car-accident/laws/

Kraut Law Group. (2017, December 4). California Vehicle Code Section 2800 VC: Disobeying A Peace Officer. Retrieved from Kraut Law Group: Criminal & Duty Lawyers: https://www.losangelescriminallawyer.pro/california-vehicle-code-section-2800-vc-disobeying-a-peace-offic.html

State of California Department of Motor Vehicles. (2016). California Vehicle Code.