Essie James, et al. v. Petra Finance, LLC, et al.

This case involves a petition for rescission of a mortgage loan based on fraud in the
inducement. The trial court granted summary judgment to the defendants on two separate
grounds. The first basis for the trial court’s grant of summary judgment was that the
plaintiff sought rescission of the loan transaction but admitted that he could not repay the
amount he received in the transaction and also admitted that he could not restore the status
quo if the note and deed of trust were rescinded. Because the plaintiff was unable to place
the parties in their prior status, the trial court found that he was not entitled to rescission.
Next, the trial court found that the plaintiff failed to identify any misrepresentation made
by the original lender and only alleged misrepresentation by the mortgage broker, who was
not a party to this lawsuit. The trial court found that the plaintiff failed to present any
evidence or legal theory showing that the mortgage broker was acting as an agent of the
original lender, so his statements were not attributable to the defendants. The plaintiff
appeals. We affirm.