MARGARET A. TREVARTHEN a/k/a MARGARET ANN TREVARTHEN, Appellant,
CHARLES E. WILSON III, individually, and as Trustee of the CHARLES E. WILSON III Revocable Trust dated February 5, 2013, and BOB JACKSON, INC., Appellees.
final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit,
Palm Beach County; Thomas H. Barkdull, Judge; L.T. Case No.
Timothy D. Kenison and William T. Viergever of Sonneborn
Rutter Cooney Viergever Burt & Lury, P.A., West Palm
Beach, for appellant.
M. Mesches of Klett, Mesches & Johnson, P.L., Palm Beach
Gardens, for appellee Bob Jackson, Inc.
an appeal from a final summary judgment entered in favor of
Bob Jackson, Inc. in Appellant's lawsuit against Bob
Jackson, Inc. and one of its real estate agents. For the
reasons set forth below, we affirm in part and reverse in
a 93-year-old woman, filed a multi-count lawsuit against Charles Wilson, a real
estate sales associate, and Bob Jackson, Inc. the brokerage
firm with whom Wilson was associated (the "Brokerage
Firm"). The suit was largely based on claims that Wilson
exploited and abused Appellant by using Appellant's money
to pay his personal expenses, entering Appellant into real
estate transactions for his own dealing and benefit, and
purchasing a condominium for himself with Appellant's
money. Appellant also sued the Brokerage Firm for one count
of "Vicarious Liability" and one count of
"Direct Liability, " alleging that the Brokerage
Firm was vicariously responsible for Wilson's actions
because it facilitated and earned commissions from
Wilson's unlawful real estate transactions and was
"directly" liable to Appellant because it did not
properly manage certain escrow funds. Specifically, Appellant
• She met Wilson through an introduction facilitated by
another agent of the Brokerage Firm whom she had used to find
a rental property.
• Wilson agreed to help her renovate and sell a
dilapidated condominium unit she owned (Unit 704) in exchange
for a share of the proceeds and an exclusive listing
agreement with the Brokerage Firm. The renovation agreement
was between Appellant and Wilson individually.
• Appellant granted Wilson status as her power of
attorney for purposes of renovating Unit 704.
• Wilson failed to consider Appellant's cost basis
when calculating his share of the proceeds from the sale of
Unit 704 and Wilson and the Brokerage Firm Received a
commission on the sale.
• Wilson convinced Appellant to purchase another
condominium unit for her personal residence, Unit 304, for
which Wilson and the Brokerage Firm received a commission.
• Wilson convinced Appellant to purchase yet another
unit, PH-2, for renovation and resale. Wilson and the
Brokerage Firm received a commission on both Appellant's
purchase and subsequent sale of PH-2. The transaction
resulted in a financial loss to Appellant.
• Wilson used Appellant's money to purchase a
condominium unit for himself which was deeded in the name of
a trust Wilson created. The Brokerage Firm's principal,
Bob Jackson, acted as the sales-agent for this transaction