Commercial Real Estate Law by Kenneth Bishop: Case Law

Debtor brought action against secured creditor, seeking damages for creditor's alleged conversion of collateral, which consisted of third party's note and security deed, and which was worth substantially more than amounts due on underlying debt. The Superior Court, Fulton County, Joel F. Fryer, J., granted summary judgment for creditor, and debtor appealed. The Court of Appeals, McMurray, P.J., held that: (1) creditor did not provide debtor with adequate notice of its retention of collateral in satisfaction of debt, and (2) transaction between debtor and creditor did not involve creation or transfer instrument involving interest in or lien on real estate, but involved pledge of collateral or lien against negotiable instruments, and, thus, creditor had to comply with notice provision of Uniform Commercial Code (UCC).

Shareholder brought private securities fraud class action against a bank holding company, and its management under § 10(b) and Rule 10b–5, alleging the holding company had fraudulently misrepresented the risk associated with its subsidiary's commercial real estate portfolio. After the jury returned a verdict partially in favor of shareholder, the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida, No. 0:07-cv-61542-UU, Ursula Ungaro, J., 2011 WL 1585605, granted holding company's motion for judgment as a matter of law, but conditionally denied holding company's motion for a new trial. Both parties appealed.

African-American former major league baseball player and Caucasian male with whom he discussed opening sports bar that would cater to African-Americans filed suit against real estate brokerage firm, its parent corporation, commercial real estate broker, and shopping center owner, alleging they were subjected to race discrimination when they attempted to lease and purchase real estate in conjunction with their plans. Defendants moved for summary judgment.

Non-profit environmental organization brought action against Army Corps of Engineers, challenging, under Administrative Procedure Act (APA) and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), Corps' issuance of permit allowing commercial real estate developer to fill wetlands and a streambed in conjunction with construction of 220 acre retail shopping center project in Alabama. Developer intervened as defendant. Cross-motions for summary judgment were filed.

The alleged misrepresentations and omissions are variously stated but fall into three categories. First, Plaintiffs allege that Defendants made misleading statements about the credit quality of various land loans in its commercial real estate (“CRE”) portfolio.

Real estate broker sued to foreclose lien which she allegedly acquired under the Commercial Real Estate Broker Lien Act. The Superior Court, Colquitt County, Cowart, J., granted defendants' motion for summary judgment, and broker appealed. The Court of Appeals, Smith, J., held that: (1) unlicensed services provided by broker were also secured by statutory lien accorded to broker under the Act, and (2) broker's lien was entitled to priority, not only over subsequently recorded deed to secure debt, but over prior encumbrance that prior encumbrancer had agreed to subordinate to this subsequently recorded deed.

Action was brought to recover on promissory note. The State Court, Fulton County, Cummings, J., entered judgment in favor of holder, and makers appealed. The Court of Appeals, Pope, J., held that: (1) fact that holder had not paid intangible tax on the note for 1986 did not preclude the action where no return for the 1986 tax was due at the time of trial, and (2) any failure of holder to possess valid broker's license would not be a defense, even though note was made as result of real estate transaction in which holder earned commission.

Commercial real estate agent sued former employer alleging breach of contract and conversion and seeking unpaid commissions. Employer countersued for breach of non-competition provision of employment contract and misappropriation of trade secrets.

COMMERCIAL LAW - Contracts. With counter-proposal, no contract was formed to make timber company liable for breach of contract.

REAL PROPERTY - Agents and Brokers. Implied contract claim seeking commission based on lease of manufacturing plant was precluded.

Purchaser of commercial property brought action against vendor, vendor's agent, and company that managed property for vendor, asserting claims of breach of contract and fraud. The Superior Court, Clayton County, Benefield, J., granted summary judgment in favor of defendants. Purchaser appealed.

The real estate buyer and the bank entered into negotiations for the sale of commercial real estate owned by the bank. Upon receipt of the real estate buyer's proposed contract, the bank's vice president twice struck out a provision of the contract that permitted the inspection of the bank's books and records.

The owner engaged the agent to find property for two showrooms. The agent procured contracts on two parcels of land and sent requests for proposals to developers.

Plaintiff barber appealed a judgment from the Columbia Superior Court (Georgia) in favor of defendant associate in an action whereby the barber sought to impose a constructive trust regarding the purchase of commercial real estate.

he court concluded that based on the language of the will and the grandfather's stated intent, the will did not create an estate tail, but gave the wife (his granddaughter) a life estate with her children to take the body of the property. The court held that the trust was a continuing trust designed to continue until the trustees completed the arrangements contemplated by the grandfather.

The executor contended that the probate court erred in holding that the estate assigned the net proceeds of a legal malpractice case to the creditor, and that the executor waived his statutory commission.

The trial court confirmed the foreclosure sales. On appeal, the court affirmed and held that: (1) the foreclosure proceedings complied with Ga. Code Ann. § 44-14-161(a) because the statute did not require the report of the sale to be formally tendered into evidence as an exhibit; (2) the trial court did not err in admitting the newspaper publisher's affidavit because a proper foundation was laid and the publisher's sworn statement was aided by a presumption of regularity; (3) the notice requirements of Ga. Code Ann. § 44-14-162.2 were not applicable to the foreclosure of the mortgagor's unimproved lots because the requirement applied only to the exercise of a power of sale of property which was to be used as a dwelling place; and (4) there was sufficient competent evidence to support the trial court's conclusion that the price brought at foreclosure was at least the true market value of each parcel.