California Real Estate Practice Exam

Disable ads (and more) with a membership for a one time $2.99 payment

Master the California Real Estate Exam with our comprehensive practice quiz. Get expert tips, detailed content review, and insider strategies to pass on your first try.

Start Multiple Choice Practice Test
Start Flash Cards

Each practice test/flash card set has 50 randomly selected questions from a bank of over 500. You'll get a new set of questions each time!

Practice this question and more.

If a buyer were to sue a broker for not inspecting a house and revealing material facts, which case might she cite?

  1. Smith v. Jones

  2. Johnson v. Williams

  3. Easton v. Strassburger

  4. Davis v. Garcia

The correct answer is: Easton v. Strassburger

In Smith v. Jones, the buyer wouldn't be able to sue the broker because the case was about false advertising, not inspection of a house. In Johnson v. Williams, the case was about negligence in a car accident, so it would not apply to a house inspection. In Davis v. Garcia, the case was about landlord and tenant disputes, which also would not apply to a broker not inspecting a house. In Easton v. Strassburger, the buyer could cite this case because it pertains to a broker's duty to disclose material facts about a property to the buyer.

More Questions Like This