Andrew Letsos listed his property for sale with Andrew Brusha, an ...

[madam-professor]

Andrew Letsos listed his property for sale with Andrew Brusha, an agent with Century 21-New West Realty, on June 15, 1990. The property was listed at a price of 229,000, and Letsos agreed to pay a 6 percent commission. After eight consecutive listing renewals and no buyers, the property was listed again at a price of 129,000 on September 16, 1992. Following a listing period at the new price that ran one and a half years with no success, Mr. Brusha contracted with Mr. Letsos to buy the property for 92,000 on March 9, 1993. Sometime later in March 1993, Mr. Brusha met Anthony Hernandez, another real estate broker. In May, Mr. Brusha and Mr. Hernandez contracted for the sale and purchase of the Letsos property for 115,000, with closing to take place on or before July 27, 1993. Letsos and Brusha closed their deal on the property in July 1993. When Letsos's attorney called Brusha for a follow-up payment, Brusha asked for some time because he would have the money as soon as his sale of the property to Hernandez closed. Letsos's attorney then told Letsos about the Hernandez sale and Letsos filed suit against Brusha and Century 21 alleging breach of fiduciary duty by Brusha in his failure to disclose the sale. Should Letsos recover for breach of fiduciary duty?

Question 2

An accountant may be able to raise the defense of the ______ in a malpractice suit by a third party.
 A) contract rule.
 B) lack of privity.
 C) known user rule.
 D) foreseeable user rule.

[pangili4]

Answer to Question 1

Brusha's fiduciary duty further required him not to deal for his own advantage, and make a profit of 23,000, undisclosed to Letsos.
One who breaches fiduciary duties has no entitlement to compensation during a willful or deliberate course of conduct, adverse to the principal's interests.

In the instant case, the defendants-brokers may be found to have breached their fiduciary duties owed to Letsos, through their secret dealings with Hernandez. They may be required to return the 4,600 broker's fee they received from Letsos for obtaining a sale of property to themselves as a penalty for their willful violation of their fiduciary duty. Further, Brusha, if found to have breached his fiduciary duty to Letsos, made a profit of 23,000. The breach could be deemed willful and Letsos may be entitled to the return of the profits made in the sale, 23,000. Letsos v. Century 21-New West Realty, 675 N.E.2d 217 (Ill. App. 1996).

Answer to Question 2

B

[madam-professor]

Thank you

[pangili4]

Happy to help you