Court Opinion

ID: 9720538
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 08:34:29.808866+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:24:19.343593
License: Public Domain

SMITH, J.
I concur solely on the ground that the appellants’ encumbrance of their Petaluma home was a unilateral mistake induced by the action of respondent. It was respondent Nevada Livestock Production *645Credit Association’s misleading statement contained in its cover letter to the deed of trust that led to appellants’ mistaken execution of that document. (Van Meter v. Bent Construction Co. (1956) 46 Cal.2d 588, 593-595 [297 P.2d 644]; Architects & Contractors Estimating Service, Inc. v. Smith (1985) 164 Cal.App.3d 1001, 1007-1008 [211 Cal.Rptr. 45]; cf. Waters v. Division of Labor Standards Enforcement (1987) 192 Cal.App.3d 635, 641 [237 Cal.Rptr. 546].)
A petition for a rehearing was denied Obtober 30, 1989.