Appeals panel hears dispute over $710,000 and whether a constructive trust was proper in Chicago Title v. Esig

Summary

At oral argument, Chicago Title told the appellate panel that $710,000 deposited in the court registry came from a fraudulent loan and that David Esig and his attorney had notice; Esig's counsel argued the record does not support imputed knowledge or the level of wrongdoing Baker v. Leonard requires.

At an appellate argument, attorneys debated whether a trial court properly imposed a constructive trust on funds Chicago Title says came from a fraudulent loan.

Mark Thompson, counsel for the appellant David Esig, told the panel his client suffered an "inequitable reversal of fortune" when the trial court imposed a constructive trust rather than permitting a judgment directly against the alleged wrongdoer, Michael Lai. Thompson urged the court to review whether the record shows necessary legal elements for such a remedy and questioned whether the panel should treat parts of the trial court's ruling as findings of fact limited to substantial-evidence review or as legal conclusions subject to de novo review.

Brian Menehan, counsel for respondents Chicago Title Insurance Company and Chicago Title of Washington, asked the court to affirm. Menehan said "Appellant David Esig…

Appeals panel hears dispute over $710,000 and whether a constructive trust was proper in Chicago Title v. Esig

Summary

Subscribe to keep reading