The sham pleading doctrine prevented plaintiffs from shifting without explanation from an original complaint which alleged seller defrauded them by representing house was “modular” rather than “manufactured”—an allegation refuted by an appraisal report attached to the complaint which revealed the true condition—to an amended complaint which alleged seller defrauded plaintiffs by saying the house was manufactured in 1979 rather than its true date, 1972. Following Willemson v. Mitrosilis (2014) 230 Cal.App.4th 622, this opinion holds that an appraiser hired to provide an appraisal for the lender’s use does not owe the borrower a duty of care.

California Court of Appeal, Third District (Raye, P.J.); April 6, 2018 (published May 7, 2018); 2018 Cal. App. LEXIS 408