AI Generated Opinion Summaries

This summary was computer-generated without any editorial revision. It is not official, has not been checked for accuracy, and is NOT citable.

Facts

• The case involves a dispute arising from a fire that destroyed the home of Dennis and Beth Heavner, insured by LM Insurance Corporation. The fire occurred after Clay Trafton, an employee of Keller Williams, recommended Ramon Perez for roofing repairs without verifying Perez's licensing or insurance. Perez's negligent work led to the fire. The Heavners and LM Insurance Corporation filed a complaint against Keller Williams and Trafton, alleging breach of contract and negligence (para 2).

Procedural History

• [Not applicable or not found]

Parties' Submissions

• Plaintiffs: Argued that Defendants breached statutory duties of care by failing to confirm the licensing status of the contractor they recommended, which directly led to the fire and subsequent damages. They also contended that the awarding of attorney fees and prejudgment interest was justified based on the listing agreement and Defendants' actions (paras 2-3, 5, 7-8, 13, 15, 19).
• Defendants: Contended that they did not owe a duty to confirm the licensing status of contractors they recommend. They argued there was no causation between their failure to confirm the contractor's licensing status and the fire. Defendants also disputed the awarding of attorney fees based on the listing agreement and claimed that the district court improperly considered confidential settlement offers during mediation for the award of prejudgment interest (paras 1, 4-5, 9, 11, 12, 14, 20).

Legal Issues

• Whether Defendants owed a duty of care to disclose the licensing status of contractors they recommend.
• Whether there was causation between Defendants' failure to confirm the contractor's licensing status and the fire.
• Whether the district court erred in awarding attorney fees based on the listing agreement.
• Whether the district court improperly considered confidential settlement offers during mediation for the award of prejudgment interest (paras 4-5, 9, 11, 12, 14, 20).

Disposition

• The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's judgment in favor of Plaintiffs, concluding that Defendants breached statutory duties of care and awarding damages as well as attorney fees and prejudgment interest (para 1).

Reasons

• BOGARDUS, Judge (Medina and Wray, JJ., concurring): The court found that transaction brokers owe a duty of reasonable care, which includes disclosing the licensing status of recommended contractors. This duty is established by the New Mexico Real Estate Commission and supported by expert testimony. The court also found sufficient evidence of causation between Defendants' failure to confirm the contractor's licensing status and the fire. Regarding attorney fees, the court interpreted the listing agreement as broad enough to include tort claims related to Defendants' negligence. Finally, the court dismissed Defendants' argument about the improper consideration of confidential settlement offers, citing lack of preservation and development of the issue (paras 4-22).